Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic Surface Engineering of Magnetic Nanoworms for In vivo Tumor Targeting

Open access
Park, Ji‐Ho, von Maltzahn, Geoffrey, Zhang, Lianglin, Derfus, Austin M., Simberg, Dmitri, Harris, Todd J., Ruoslahti, Erkki, Bhatia, Sangeeta N., Sailor, Michael J.·2009·Small

Abstract

In the design of nanoparticles that can target disease tissue in vivo, parameters such as targeting ligand density, type of target receptor, and nanoparticle shape can play an important role in determining the extent of accumulation. Herein, a systematic study of these parameters for the targeting of mouse xenograft tumors is performed using superparamagnetic iron oxide as a model nanoparticle system. The type of targeting peptide (recognizing cell surface versus extracellular matrix), the surface coverage of the peptide, its attachment chemistry, and the shape of the nanomaterial [elongated (nanoworm, NW) versus spherical (nanosphere, NS)] are varied. Nanoparticle circulation times and in vivo tumor‐targeting efficiencies are quantified in two xenograft models of human tumors (MDA‐MB‐435 human carcinoma and HT1080 human fibrosarcoma). It is found that the in vivo tumor‐targeting ability of the NW is superior to that of the NS, that the smaller, neutral CREKA targeting group is more effective than the larger, positively charged F3 molecule, that a maximum in tumor‐targeting efficiency and blood half‐life is observed with ≈60 CREKA peptides per NW for either the HT1080 or the MDA‐MB‐435 tumor types, and that incorporation of a 5‐kDa polyethylene glycol linker improves targeting to both tumor types relative to a short linker. It is concluded that the blood half‐life of a targeting molecule–nanomaterial ensemble is a key consideration when selecting the appropriate ligand and nanoparticle chemistry for tumor targeting.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/smll.200801789

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 293

Metadata

Authors
Park, J., von Maltzahn, G., Zhang, L., Derfus, A. M., Simberg, D., Harris, T. J., Ruoslahti, E., Bhatia, S. N., & Sailor, M. J.
Venue
Small
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-03-20
Volume
5
Issue
6
Pages
694-700
ISSN
  • 1613-6810 (ISSN-L)
  • 1613-6829
OpenAlex
W2152121678
Cited by
293
References
2
FWCI
12.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systematic Surface Engineering of Magnetic Nanoworms for In vivo Tumor Targeting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/smll.200801789
The paper
Park, J., von Maltzahn, G., Zhang, L., Derfus, A. M., Simberg, D., Harris, T. J., Ruoslahti, E., Bhatia, S. N., & Sailor, M. J. (2009). Systematic Surface Engineering of Magnetic Nanoworms for In vivo Tumor Targeting. Small. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.200801789

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.