| Title |
Efficacy of sustained delivery of GC-1 from a Nanofluidic system in a spontaneously obese non-human primate: a case study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomedical Microdevices, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10544-018-0296-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carly S. Filgueira, Giacomo Bruno, Zachary W. Smith, Corrine Ying Xuan Chua, Andrea Ballerini, Marco Folci, April L. Gilbert, Priya Jain, Jagannadha K. Sastry, Pramod N. Nehete, Kathryn A. Shelton, Lori R. Hill, Areeba Ali, Keith A. Youker, Alessandro Grattoni |
| Abstract |
With nearly 40% of U.S. adults obese, and childhood and adolescent rates rising, obesity and associated comorbidities are serious public health concerns with massive societal costs. Often, lifestyle interventions do not offer sufficient weight loss to improve health, requiring surgery and medications as adjunct management strategies. Here, we present a 4-month case study in which the sustained, low-dose, and constant administration of the thyroid receptor β selective agonist GC-1 (sobetirome) from a novel nanochannel membrane implant was assessed in an obese, pre-diabetic rhesus macaque. Dramatic loss of white adipose tissue in the abdomen from 36 to 18% was observed via magnetic resonance imaging in conjunction with normalized serum insulin and glycemia, with no signs of cardiotoxicity shown. The non-human primate study highlights sustained low-dose delivery of GC-1 from our minimally invasive subcutaneous implant as a valuable approach to induce weight loss and manage obesity and comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Librarian | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 3 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 28 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,609,860
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#75
of 756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,180
of 328,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 756 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 328,114 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.