You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Evaluation of Polymeric Nanomedicines Targeted to PSMA: Effect of Ligand on Targeting Efficiency
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomacromolecules, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1021/acs.biomac.5b00913 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adrian V. Fuchs, Brian W.C. Tse, Amanda K. Pearce, Mei-Chun Yeh, Nicholas L. Fletcher, Steve S. Huang, Warren D. Heston, Andrew K. Whittaker, Pamela J. Russell, Kristofer J. Thurecht |
| Abstract |
Targeted nanomedicines offer a strategy for greatly enhancing accumulation of a therapeutic within a specific tissue in animals. In this study, we report on the comparative targeting efficiency toward prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) of a number of different ligands that are covalently attached by the same chemistry to a polymeric nanocarrier. The targeting ligands included a small molecule (glutamate urea), a peptide ligand, and a monoclonal antibody (J591). A hyperbranched polymer (HBP) was utilized as the nanocarrier and contained a fluorophore for tracking/analysis, whereas the pendant functional chain-ends provided a handle for ligand conjugation. Targeting efficiency of each ligand was assessed in vitro using flow cytometry and confocal microscopy to compare degree of binding and internalization of the HBPs by human prostate cancer (PCa) cell lines with different PSMA expression status (PC3-PIP (PSMA+) and PC3-FLU (PSMA-). The peptide ligand was further investigated in vivo, in which BALB/c nude mice bearing subcutaneous PC3-PIP and PC3-FLU PCa tumors were injected intravenously with the HBP-peptide conjugate and assessed by fluorescence imaging. Enhanced accumulation in the tumor tissue of PC3-PIP compared to PC3-FLU highlighted the applicability of this system as a future imaging and therapeutic delivery vehicle. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 28% |
| Researcher | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 12 | 26% |
| Engineering | 6 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 September 2015.
All research outputs
#18,425,370
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Biomacromolecules
#3,825
of 4,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,520
of 266,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomacromolecules
#49
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,401 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 266,946 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.