ArticleBiology2024
Peptide-Guided Nanoparticle Drug Delivery for Cardiomyocytes.
Article in Biology, 2024. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Restoring autophagy-apoptosis balance in diabetic cardiomyopathy via a biomimetic, ROS-responsive nanocarrier associated with Mst1 pathway modulation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Article
- Phytomedicines modulate pyroptosis in cardiovascular diseases: pre-clinical evidence, limitations and translational perspectives.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Nanomedicine for Cardiac Repair in Heart Failure: From Targeted Delivery to Regenerative Modulation.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Flow cytometry of the myocardium: An end-to-end analysis of adult cardiomyocytes isolated from pig and mouse hearts.Journal of molecular and cellular cardiology · 2025Article
- In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation of Lactoferrin-Modified Liposomal Etomidate with Enhanced Brain-Targeting Effect for General Anesthesia.Pharmaceutics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNanoparticles (NPs) have been extensively utilized as a drug delivery system to control the release of therapeutic agents to treat cardiac injuries. However, despite the advantages of utilizing NP-based drug delivery for treating heart diseases, the current delivery system lacks specificity in targeting the cardiac tissue, thus limiting its application.
methodsWe created three linear peptides, each consisting of 16-24 amino acids. These peptides were conjugated on the surface of NPs, resulting in the formation of cardiac targeting peptide (CTP)-NPs (designated as CTP-NP1, CTP-NP2, and CTP-NP3). To assess their effectiveness, we compared the binding efficiency of these three CTP-NPs to human and mouse cardiomyocytes. Additionally, we determined their distribution 24 h after injecting the CTP-NPs intravenously into adult C57BL/6J mice.
resultsWhen compared to control NPs without CTP (Con-NPs), all three CTP-NPs exhibited significantly increased binding affinity to both human and mouse cardiomyocytes in vitro and enhanced retention in mouse hearts in vivo. A thorough assessment of the heart sections demonstrated that the binding specificity of CTP-NP3 to cardiomyocytes in vivo was significantly greater than that of Con-NPs. None of the three CTP-NPs were proven to cause cardiomyocyte apoptosis.
conclusionsBiocompatible and safe CTP-NP3 can target the heart via binding to cardiomyocytes. This approach of targeting specific molecules-coated NPs may help in delivering therapeutic compounds to cardiomyocytes for the treatment of heart diseases with high efficacy and low toxicity to other tissues.
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.