Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35214005›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutics2022

PEGylated versus Non-PEGylated pH-Sensitive Liposomes: New Insights from a Comparative Antitumor Activity Study.

Shirleide Santos Nunes, Juliana de Oliveira Silva, Renata Salgado Fernandes, Sued Eustaquio Mendes Miranda, Elaine Amaral Leite, Marcelo Alexandre de Farias, Rodrigo Villares Portugal, Geovanni Dantas Cassali, Danyelle M Townsend, Mônica Cristina Oliveira and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Shirleide Santos NunesDepartment of Pharmaceutical Products, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.
Juliana de Oliveira SilvaDepartment of Pharmaceutical Products, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.
Renata Salgado FernandesDepartment of Pharmaceutical Products, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.
Sued Eustaquio Mendes MirandaDepartment of Pharmaceutical Products, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.
Elaine Amaral LeiteDepartment of Pharmaceutical Products, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8812-3811
Marcelo Alexandre de FariasBrazilian Nanotechnology National Laboratory (LNNano), Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials (CNPEM), Campinas 13083-100, Brazil.
Rodrigo Villares PortugalBrazilian Nanotechnology National Laboratory (LNNano), Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials (CNPEM), Campinas 13083-100, Brazil.
Geovanni Dantas CassaliDepartment of General Pathology, Institute of Biological Sciences, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.
Danyelle M TownsendDepartment of Drug Discovery and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA.
Mônica Cristina OliveiraDepartment of Pharmaceutical Products, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.
André Luís Branco de BarrosDepartment of Clinical and Toxicological Analyses, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BRBrazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials · BRMedical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

SOUTH CAROLINA COBRE IN OXIDANTS, REDOX BALANCE AND STRESS SIGNALINGP20GM103542 · NIGMS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI TEW, KENNETH D. · 2012 to 2020
$20.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103542
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PEGylated liposomes are largely studied as long-circulating drug delivery systems. Nevertheless, the addition of PEG can result in reduced interactions between liposomes and cells, hindering liposomal internalization into target cells. The presence of PEG on the surface of pH-sensitive liposomes is not advantageous in terms of biodistribution and tumor uptake, raising the question of whether the indiscriminate use of PEG benefits the formulation. In this study, two doxorubicin-loaded pH-sensitive liposomal formulations, PEGylated (Lip2000-DOX) or non-PEGylated (Lip-DOX), were prepared and characterized. Overall, the PEGylated and non-PEGylated liposomes showed no differences in size or morphology in Cryo-TEM image analysis. Specifically, DLS analysis showed a mean diameter of 140 nm, PDI lower than 0.2, and zeta potential close to neutrality. Both formulations showed an EP higher than 90%. With respect to drug delivery, Lip-DOX had better cellular uptake than Lip

Indexed as

antitumor activitydoxorubicinliposomesPEGylated liposomespolyethylene glycol

Identifiers

PMID35214005
PMCPMC8874560
OpenAlexW4210309476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.