Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pharmacokinetics of metallic nanoparticles

Lin, Zhoumeng, Monteiro‐Riviere, Nancy A., Riviere, Jim E.·2015·WIREs Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology

Abstract

Metallic nanoparticles (NPs) have been widely applied in the field of nanomedicine. A comprehensive understanding of their pharmacokinetics is crucial for proper risk assessment and safe biomedical applications. This review focuses on gold and silver (Ag) NPs, and briefly discusses iron oxide, titanium dioxide (TiO 2), and zinc oxide NPs. Pharmacokinetics of metallic NPs depends on the particle type, size, surface charge, surface coating, protein binding, exposure route, dose, and species. Generally, blood half‐life is shorter in rodents than in larger laboratory animals (e.g., rabbits or monkeys) and differs between intravenous and oral exposures. Oral, dermal, or inhalational absorption is low (≤5%), but may increase with smaller sizes, negative charge, and appropriate coatings. Metallic NPs can be distributed throughout the body, primarily accumulating in the liver, spleen, and lymph node due to nonspecific uptake by reticuloendothelial cells, and could remain in the body for ≥6 months. Metallic NPs (≤100 nm) can cross the blood–brain barrier (BBB), favored by coating with BBB‐permeable neuropeptides. Placental transfer depends on the stage of embryonic/placental maturation and surface composition, and may be enhanced by coating with biocompatible molecules (e.g., ferritin or polyethylene glycol). Renal and biliary excretion is generally low due to persistent accumulation in tissues, but renal elimination could be substantially increased with smaller sizes and specific coatings (e.g., glutathione). Physiologically based pharmacokinetic models for gold/dendrimer composite nanodevices, AgNPs, and TiO 2 NPs have been developed in rats and the AgNP and TiO 2 NP models have been extrapolated to humans to support risk assessment and nanomedicine applications. WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 2015, 7:189–217. doi: 10.1002/wnan.1304 This article is categorized under: Toxicology and Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine > Toxicology of Nanomaterials

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/wnan.1304

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Lin, Z., Monteiro‐Riviere, N. A., & Riviere, J. E.
Venue
WIREs Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-10-15
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
189-217
ISSN
  • 1939-0041 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-5116
OpenAlex
W2120553873
Cited by
257
References
6
FWCI
7.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Pharmacokinetics of metallic nanoparticles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/wnan.1304
The paper
Lin, Z., Monteiro‐Riviere, N. A., & Riviere, J. E. (2015). Pharmacokinetics of metallic nanoparticles. WIREs Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology. https://doi.org/10.1002/wnan.1304

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.