ArticlePharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2021
CPPs to the Test: Effects on Binding, Uptake and Biodistribution of a Tumor Targeting Nanobody.
Article in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nanobodies targeting SARS-CoV-2 variants.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2026Review
- Nanobody-Based Drug Delivery: Emerging Strategies for Targeted Cancer Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- The intracellular visualization of exogenous DNA in fluorescence microscopy.Drug delivery and translational research · 2024Review
- Filtration and tubular handling of EWE-hC3Nb1, a complement inhibitor nanobody, in wild type mice and a mouse model of proteinuric kidney disease.FEBS open bio · 2024Article
- Pyroptosis inhibiting nanobodies block Gasdermin D pore formation.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Nanobodies: Robust miniprotein binders in biomedicine.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2023Review
- Enzymatic ligation of an antibody and arginine 9 peptide for efficient and cell-specific siRNA delivery.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Nanobodies are well-established targeting ligands for molecular imaging and therapy. Their short circulation time enables early imaging and reduces systemic radiation exposure. However, shorter circulation time leads to lower tracer accumulation in the target tissue. Cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs) improve cellular uptake of various cargoes, including nanobodies. CPPs could enhance tissue retention without compromising rapid clearance. However, systematic investigations on how the functionalities of nanobody and CPP combine with each other at the level of 2D and 3D cell cultures and in vivo are lacking. Here, we demonstrate that conjugates of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-binding nanobody 7D12 with different CPPs (nonaarginine, penetratin, Tat and hLF) differ with respect to cell binding and induction of endocytosis. For nonaarginine and penetratin we compared the competition of EGF binding and performance of L- and D-peptide stereoisomers, and tested the D-peptide conjugates in tumor cell spheroids and in vivo. The D-peptide conjugates showed better penetration into spheroids than the unconjugated 7D12. Both in vivo and in vitro, the behavior of the agent reflects the combination of both functionalities. Although CPPs cause promising increases in in vitro uptake and 3D penetration, the dominant effect of the CPP in the control of biodistribution warrants further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.