Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37264768›Full record

ArticleSmall (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany)2023

Lung Persistence, Biodegradation, and Elimination of Graphene-Based Materials are Predominantly Size-Dependent and Mediated by Alveolar Phagocytes.

Thomas Loret, Luis Augusto Visani de Luna, Matteo Andrea Lucherelli, Alexander Fordham, Neus Lozano, Alberto Bianco, Kostas Kostarelos, Cyrill Bussy

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Safety Assessment of Graphene-Based Materials.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Thomas LoretNanomedicine Lab 2.0, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9171-9819
Luis Augusto Visani de LunaNanomedicine Lab 2.0, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0375-1064
Matteo Andrea LucherelliCNRS, Immunology, Immunopathology and Therapeutic Chemistry, UPR 3572, University of Strasbourg, ISIS, Strasbourg, 67000, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1055-3269
Alexander FordhamNanomedicine Lab 2.0, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9093-408X
Neus LozanoCatalan Institute of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (ICN2), CSIC and BIST, Campus UAB, Bellaterra, Barcelona, 08193, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9026-1743
Alberto BiancoCNRS, Immunology, Immunopathology and Therapeutic Chemistry, UPR 3572, University of Strasbourg, ISIS, Strasbourg, 67000, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1090-296X
Kostas KostarelosNanomedicine Lab 2.0, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2224-6672
Cyrill BussyNanomedicine Lab 2.0, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8870-443X
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInstitut Català de Nanociència i Nanotecnologia · ES

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Graphene-based materials (GBMs) have promising applications in various sectors, including pulmonary nanomedicine. Nevertheless, the influence of GBM physicochemical characteristics on their fate and impact in lung has not been thoroughly addressed. To fill this gap, the biological response, distribution, and bio-persistence of four different GBMs in mouse lungs up to 28 days after single oropharyngeal aspiration are investigated. None of the GBMs, varying in size (large versus small) and carbon to oxygen ratio as well as thickness (few-layers graphene (FLG) versus thin graphene oxide (GO)), induce a strong pulmonary immune response. However, recruited neutrophils internalize nanosheets better and degrade GBMs faster than macrophages, revealing their crucial role in the elimination of small GBMs. In contrast, large GO sheets induce more damages due to a hindered degradation and long-term persistence in macrophages. Overall, small dimensions appear to be a leading feature in the design of safe GBM pulmonary nanovectors due to an enhanced degradation in phagocytes and a faster clearance from the lungs for small GBMs. Thickness also plays an important role, since decreased material loading in alveolar phagocytes and faster elimination are found for FLGs compared to thinner GOs. These results are important for designing safer-by-design GBMs for biomedical application.

Indexed as

GraphiteAnimalsLungMacrophagesMicegraphene oxideGraphitealveolar phagocytescarbon materialsclearancedegradationin vivotoxicity

Identifiers

PMID37264768
PMCPMC11475755
OpenAlexW4379095208

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.