ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2023
Bimodal brush-functionalized nanoparticles selective to receptor surface density.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Steric hindrance-mediated extracellular vesicle size fractionation for rapid prehospital diagnosis of intracerebral hemorrhage.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Selective mRNA Delivery to Activated Macrophages via Hyaluronic Acid-Functionalized Lipid Nanoparticles with Optimized PEGylation.Biomacromolecules · 2026Article
- From Single Ligand-Receptor Bond Strength to Collective Avidity: Mechanics-Guided Superselective Nanoparticle Adhesion to Biological Membranes.Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids · 2025Article
- Hopping and crawling DNA-coated colloids.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- The Role of Receptor Uniformity in Multivalent Binding.JACS Au · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nanoparticles or drug carriers which can selectively bind to cells expressing receptors above a certain threshold surface density are very promising for targeting cells overexpressing specific receptors under pathological conditions. Simulations and theoretical studies have suggested that such selectivity can be enhanced by functionalizing nanoparticles with a bimodal polymer monolayer (BM) containing shorter ligated chains and longer inert protective chains. However, a systematic study of the effect of these parameters under tightly controlled conditions is still missing. Here, we develop well-defined and highly specific platforms mimicking particle-cell interface using surface chemistry to provide a experimental proof of such selectivity. Using surface plasmon resonance and atomic force microscopy, we report the selective adsorption of BM-functionalized nanoparticles, and especially, a significant enhanced selective behavior by using a BM with longer protective chains. Furthermore, a model is also developed to describe the repulsive contribution of the protective brush to nanoparticle adsorption. This model is combined with super-selectivity theory to support experimental findings and shows that the observed selectivity is due to the steric energy barrier which requires a high number of ligand-receptor bonds to allow nanoparticle adsorption. Finally, the results show how the relative length and molar ratio of two chains can be tuned to target a threshold surface density of receptors and thus lay the foundation for the rational design of BM-functionalized nanoparticles for selective targeting.
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.