↓ Skip to main content

Nanotechnology for breast cancer therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Biomedical Microdevices, July 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
122 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
233 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Nanotechnology for breast cancer therapy
Published in
Biomedical Microdevices, July 2008
DOI 10.1007/s10544-008-9209-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takemi Tanaka, Paolo Decuzzi, Massimo Cristofanilli, Jason H. Sakamoto, Ennio Tasciotti, Fredika M. Robertson, Mauro Ferrari

Abstract

Breast cancer is the field of medicine with the greatest presence of nanotechnological therapeutic agents in the clinic. A pegylated form of liposomally encapsulated doxorubicin is routinely used for treatment against metastatic cancer, and albumin nanoparticulate chaperones of paclitaxel were approved for locally recurrent and metastatic disease in 2005. These drugs have yielded substantial clinical benefit, and are steadily gathering greater beneficial impact. Clinical trials currently employing these drugs in combination with chemo and biological therapeutics exceed 150 worldwide. Despite these advancements, breast cancer morbidity and mortality is unacceptably high. Nanotechnology offers potential solutions to the historical challenge that has rendered breast cancer so difficult to contain and eradicate: the extreme biological diversity of the disease presentation in the patient population and in the evolutionary changes of any individual disease, the multiple pathways that drive disease progression, the onset of 'resistance' to established therapeutic cocktails, and the gravity of the side effects to treatment, which result from generally very poor distribution of the injected therapeutic agents in the body. A fundamental requirement for success in the development of new therapeutic strategies is that breast cancer specialists-in the clinic, the pharmaceutical and the basic biological laboratory-and nanotechnologists-engineers, physicists, chemists and mathematicians-optimize their ability to work in close collaboration. This further requires a mutual openness across cultural and language barriers, academic reward systems, and many other 'environmental' divides. This paper is respectfully submitted to the community to help foster the mutual interactions of the breast cancer world with micro- and nano-technology, and in particular to encourage the latter community to direct ever increasing attention to breast cancer, where an extraordinary beneficial impact may result. The paper initiates with an introductory overview of breast cancer, its current treatment modalities, and the current role of nanotechnology in the clinic. Our perspectives are then presented on what the greatest opportunities for nanotechnology are; this follows from an analysis of the role of biological barriers that adversely determine the biological distribution of intravascularly injected therapeutic agents. Different generations of nanotechnology tools for drug delivery are reviewed, and our current strategy for addressing the sequential bio-barriers is also presented, and is accompanied by an encouragement to the community to develop even more effective ones.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
India 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Unknown 221 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 17%
Student > Master 33 14%
Researcher 27 12%
Student > Bachelor 26 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 4%
Other 40 17%
Unknown 57 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 23 10%
Engineering 22 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 9%
Other 48 21%
Unknown 64 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2014.
All research outputs
#7,195,155
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#221
of 746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,163
of 81,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 746 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 81,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.