Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 221

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Binding Site Barrier Elicited by Tumor-Associated Fibroblasts Interferes Disposition of Nanoparticles in Stroma-Vessel Type Tumors

Open access
Miao, Lei, Newby, Jay M., Lin, C. Michael, Zhang, Lu, Xu, Feifei, Kim, William Y., Forest, M. Gregory, Lai, Samuel K., Milowsky, Matthew I., Wobker, Sara E., Huang, Leaf·2016·ACS Nano

Abstract

The binding site barrier (BSB) was originally proposed to describe the binding behavior of antibodies to cells peripheral to blood vessels, preventing their further penetration into the tumors. Yet, it is revisited herein to describe the intratumoral cellular disposition of nanoparticles (NPs). Specifically, the BSB limits NP diffusion and results in unintended internalization of NPs by stroma cells localized near blood vessels. This not only limits the therapeutic outcome but also promotes adverse off-target effects. In the current study, it was shown that tumor-associated fibroblast cells (TAFs) are the major component of the BSB, particularly in tumors with a stroma-vessel architecture where the location of TAFs aligns with blood vessels. Specifically, TAF distance to blood vessels, expression of receptor proteins, and binding affinity affect the intensity of the BSB. The physical barrier elicited by extracellular matrix also prolongs the retention of NPs in the stroma, potentially contributing to the BSB. The influence of particle size on the BSB was also investigated. The strongest BSB effect was found with small (∼18 nm) NPs targeted with the anisamide ligand. The uptake of these NPs by TAFs was about 7-fold higher than that of the other cells 16 h post-intravenous injection. This was because TAFs also expressed the sigma receptor under the influence of TGF-β secreted by the tumor cells. Overall, the current study underscores the importance of BSBs in the delivery of nanotherapeutics and provides a rationale for exploiting BSBs to target TAFs.

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.6b02776

Cites

7 of 7 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 221

Metadata

Authors
Miao, L., Newby, J. M., Lin, C. M., Zhang, L., Xu, F., Kim, W. Y., Forest, M. G., Lai, S. K., Milowsky, M. I., Wobker, S. E., & Huang, L.
Venue
ACS Nano
Published
2016-09-28
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
9243-9258
ISSN
  • 1936-0851 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-086X
OpenAlex
W2522400683
Cited by
221
References
7
FWCI
8.14
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.