↓ Skip to main content

Targeting Nanomedicines to Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Specificity of Ligands to Two Different Receptors In Vivo

Overview of attention for article published in Pharmaceutical Research, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
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.
Title
Targeting Nanomedicines to Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Specificity of Ligands to Two Different Receptors In Vivo
Published in
Pharmaceutical Research, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11095-016-1945-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amanda K. Pearce, Adrian V. Fuchs, Nicholas L. Fletcher, Kristofer J. Thurecht

Abstract

This manuscript utilised in vivo multispectral imaging to demonstrate the efficacy of two different nanomedicine formulations for targeting prostate cancer. Pegylated hyperbranched polymers were labelled with fluorescent markers and targeting ligands against two different prostate cancer markers; prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and the protein kinase, EphrinA2 receptor (EphA2). The PSMA targeted nanomedicine utilised a small molecule glutamate urea inhibitor of the protein, while the EphA2 targeted nanomedicine was conjugated to a single-chain variable fragment based on the antibody 4B3 that has shown high affinity to the receptor. Hyperbranched polymers were synthesised bearing the different targeting ligands. In the case of the EphA2-targeting nanomedicine, significant in vitro uptake was observed in PC3 prostate cancer cells that overexpress the receptor, while low uptake was observed in LNCaP cells (that have minimal expression of this receptor). Conversely, the PSMA-targeted nanomedicine showed high uptake in LNCaP cells, with only minor uptake in the PC3 cells. In a dual-tumour xenograft mouse model, the nanomedicines showed high uptake in tumours in which the receptor was overexpressed, with only minimal non-specific accumulation in the low-expression tumours. This work highlighted the importance of clearly defining the target of interest in next-generation nanomedicines, and suggests that dual-targeting in such nanomedicines may be a means to achieve greater efficacy.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Master 3 8%
Professor 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 11 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 11 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,264,928
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Pharmaceutical Research
#2,159
of 2,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,632
of 335,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmaceutical Research
#31
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,859 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 335,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.