Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 277

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Positron Emission Tomography Based Elucidation of the Enhanced Permeability and Retention Effect in Dogs with Cancer Using Copper-64 Liposomes

Open access
Hansen, Anders E., Petersen, Anncatrine L., Henriksen, Jonas R., Boerresen, Betina, Rasmussen, Palle, Elema, Dennis R., Rosenschöld, Per Munck af, Kristensen, Annemarie T., Kjær, Andreas, Andresen, Thomas L.·2015·ACS Nano
DOI 10.1021/acsnano.5b01324
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Since the first report of the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect, the research in nanocarrier based antitumor drugs has been intense. The field has been devoted to treatment of cancer by exploiting EPR-based accumulation of nanocarriers in solid tumors, which for many years was considered to be a ubiquitous phenomenon. However, the understanding of differences in the EPR-effect between tumor types, heterogeneities within each patient group, and dependency on tumor development stage in humans is sparse. It is therefore important to enhance our understanding of the EPR-effect in large animals and humans with spontaneously developed cancer. In the present paper, we describe a novel loading method of copper-64 into PEGylated liposomes and use these liposomes to evaluate the EPR-effect in 11 canine cancer patients with spontaneous solid tumors by PET/CT imaging. We thereby provide the first high-resolution analysis of EPR-based tumor accumulation in large animals. We find that the EPR-effect is strong in some tumor types but cannot be considered a general feature of solid malignant tumors since we observed a high degree of accumulation heterogeneity between tumors. Six of seven included carcinomas displayed high uptake levels of liposomes, whereas one of four sarcomas displayed signs of liposome retention. We conclude that nanocarrier-radiotracers could be important in identifying cancer patients that will benefit from nanocarrier-based therapeutics in clinical practice.

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 · 10.1021/acsnano.5b01324

Cites

32 of 32 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

Cited by

See all 277

Metadata

Authors
Hansen, A. E., Petersen, A. L., Henriksen, J. R., Boerresen, B., Rasmussen, P., Elema, D. R., Rosenschöld, P. M. A., Kristensen, A. T., Kjær, A., & Andresen, T. L.
Venue
ACS Nano
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2015-06-12
Volume
9
Issue
7
Pages
6985-6995
ISSN
  • 1936-0851 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-086X
DOI
10.1021/acsnano.5b01324
OpenAlex
W1497889772
Cited by
277
References
32
FWCI
9.90
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

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.