The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intravascular Delivery of Particulate Systems: Does Geometry Really Matter?
Open accessAbstract
In cancer therapy and imaging, the systemic passive delivery of particulate systems has relied on the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect: sufficiently small particles can cross the endothelial fenestrations and accumulate in the tumor parenchyma. The vast majority of man-made particulates exhibit a spherical shape as a result of surface energy minimization during their synthesis. The advent of phage display libraries, which are revealing the extraordinary molecular diversity of endothelial cells, and the development of processes for fabricating particles with shapes other than spherical are opening the path to new design solutions for systemically administered targeted particulates. In this paper, the role of particle geometry (i.e., size and shape) is discussed at the tissue and cellular scales. Emphasis is placed on how the synergistic effect of particle geometry and molecular targeting can enhance the specificity of delivery. The intravascular delivery process has been broken into three events: margination, firm adhesion and control of internalization. Predictions from mathematical models and observations from in-vitro experiments were used to show the relevance of particle geometry in systemic delivery. Rational design of particulate systems should consider, beside the physico-chemical properties of the surface coatings, geometrical features as size and shape. The integration of mathematical modeling with in-vitro and in-vivo testing provides the tools for establishing a rational design of nanoparticles.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cancer nanotechnology: opportunities and challenges
Ferrari, M. (2005) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1566 · Cited by 4,558
Nanomedicine: current status and future prospects
Moghimi, S. M., Hunter, A. C., & Murray, J. C. (2005) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.04-2747rev · Cited by 2,029
Cited by
Principles of nanoparticle design for overcoming biological barriers to drug delivery
Blanco, E., Shen, H., & Ferrari, M. (2015) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3330 · Cited by 7,002
Strategies in the design of nanoparticles for therapeutic applications
Petros, R. A., & DeSimone, J. M. (2010) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd2591 · Cited by 3,651
Impact of Nanotechnology on Drug Delivery
Farokhzad, O. C., & Langer, R. (2009) · ACS Nano · doi:10.1021/nn900002m · Cited by 3,348
Engineered Nanoparticles for Drug Delivery in Cancer Therapy
Sun, T., Zhang, Y. S., Pang, B., Hyun, D. C., Yang, M., & Xia, Y. (2014) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201403036 · Cited by 2,164
Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery in Cancer Therapy and Its Role in Overcoming Drug Resistance
Yao, Y., Zhou, Y., Liu, L., Xu, Y., Chen, Q., Wang, Y., Wu, S., Deng, Y., Zhang, J., & Shao, A. (2020) · Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences · doi:10.3389/fmolb.2020.00193 · Cited by 1,451
Metadata
- Authors
- Decuzzi, P., Pasqualini, R., Arap, W., & Ferrari, M.
- Venue
- Pharmaceutical Research
- Published
- 2008-08-20
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 235-43
- ISSN
- 0724-8741 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-904X
- OpenAlex
- W1968937054
- Cited by
- 616
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 13.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Intravascular Delivery of Particulate Systems: Does Geometry Really Matter? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11095-008-9697-x
- The paper
- Decuzzi, P., Pasqualini, R., Arap, W., & Ferrari, M. (2009). Intravascular Delivery of Particulate Systems: Does Geometry Really Matter? Pharmaceutical Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-008-9697-x
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.