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 |
Growth factor choice is critical for successful functionalization of nanoparticles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2015.00305 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Josephine Pinkernelle, Vittoria Raffa, Maria P. Calatayud, Gerado F. Goya, Cristina Riggio, Gerburg Keilhoff |
| Abstract |
Nanoparticles (NPs) show new characteristics compared to the corresponding bulk material. These nanoscale properties make them interesting for various applications in biomedicine and life sciences. One field of application is the use of magnetic NPs to support regeneration in the nervous system. Drug delivery requires a functionalization of NPs with bio-functional molecules. In our study, we functionalized self-made PEI-coated iron oxide NPs with nerve growth factor (NGF) and glial cell-line derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF). Next, we tested the bio-functionality of NGF in a rat pheochromocytoma cell line (PC12) and the bio-functionality of GDNF in an organotypic spinal cord culture. Covalent binding of NGF to PEI-NPs impaired bio-functionality of NGF, but non-covalent approach differentiated PC12 cells reliably. Non-covalent binding of GDNF showed a satisfying bio-functionality of GDNF:PEI-NPs, but turned out to be unstable in conjugation to the PEI-NPs. Taken together, our study showed the importance of assessing bio-functionality and binding stability of functionalized growth factors using proper biological models. It also shows that successful functionalization of magnetic NPs with growth factors is dependent on the used binding chemistry and that it is hardly predictable. For use as therapeutics, functionalization strategies have to be reproducible and future studies are needed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 16% |
| Researcher | 7 | 16% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 10 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 13% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 11% |
| Engineering | 4 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 24% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 September 2022.
All research outputs
#14,473,828
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,757
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,171
of 277,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#57
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 277,050 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.