↓ Skip to main content

TLc-A, the leading nanochelating-based nanochelator, reduces iron overload in vitro and in vivo

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Hematology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
TLc-A, the leading nanochelating-based nanochelator, reduces iron overload in vitro and in vivo
Published in
International Journal of Hematology, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12185-015-1932-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Somayeh Kalanaky, Maryam Hafizi, Sepideh Safari, Kazem Mousavizadeh, Mahboubeh Kabiri, Alireza Farsinejad, Saideh Fakharzadeh, Mohammad Hassan Nazaran

Abstract

Iron chelation therapy is an effective approach to the treatment of iron overload conditions, in which iron builds up to toxic levels in the body and may cause organ damage. Treatments using deferoxamine, deferasirox and deferiprone have been introduced and despite their disadvantages, they remain the first-line therapeutics in iron chelation therapy. Our study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the iron chelation agent TLc-A, a nano chelator synthetized based on the novel nanochelating technology, with deferoxamine. We found that TLc-A reduced iron overload in Caco2 cell line more efficiently than deferoxamine. In rats with iron overload, very low concentrations of TLc-A lowered serum iron level after only three injections of the nanochelator, while deferoxamine was unable to reduce iron level after the same number of injections. Compared with deferoxamine, TLc-A significantly increased urinary iron excretion and reduced hepatic iron content. The toxicity study showed that the intraperitoneal median lethal dose for TLc-A was at least two times higher than that for deferoxamine. In conclusion, our in vitro and in vivo studies indicate that the novel nano chelator compound, TLc-A, offers superior performance in iron reduction than the commercially available and widely used deferoxamine.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 19%
Unspecified 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 8 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 2 13%
Unspecified 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 8 50%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,333,181
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Hematology
#1,085
of 1,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#334,279
of 397,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Hematology
#16
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,395 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 397,467 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.