The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Antibiofouling Polymer-Coated Gold Nanoparticles as a Contrast Agent for in Vivo X-ray Computed Tomography Imaging
Abstract
Current computed tomography (CT) contrast agents such as iodine-based compounds have several limitations, including short imaging times due to rapid renal clearance, renal toxicity, and vascular permeation. Here, we describe a new CT contrast agent based on gold nanoparticles (GNPs) that overcomes these limitations. Because gold has a higher atomic number and X-ray absorption coefficient than iodine, we expected that GNPs can be used as CT contrast agents. We prepared uniform GNPs ( approximately 30 nm in diameter) by general reduction of HAuCl4 by boiling with sodium citrate. The resulting GNPs were coated with polyethylene glycol (PEG) to impart antibiofouling properties, which extends their lifetime in the bloodstream. Measurement of the X-ray absorption coefficient in vitro revealed that the attenuation of PEG-coated GNPs is 5.7 times higher than that of the current iodine-based CT contrast agent, Ultravist. Furthermore, when injected intravenously into rats, the PEG-coated GNPs had a much longer blood circulation time (>4 h) than Ultravist (<10 min). Consequently, CT images of rats using PEG-coated GNPs showed a clear delineation of cardiac ventricles and great vessels. On the other hand, relatively high levels of GNPs accumulated in the spleen and liver, which contain phagocytic cells. Intravenous injection of PEG-coated GNPs into hepatoma-bearing rats resulted in a high contrast ( approximately 2-fold) between hepatoma and normal liver tissue on CT images. These results suggest that PEG-coated GNPs can be useful as a CT contrast agent for a blood pool and hepatoma imaging.
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
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
Biodegradable synthetic polymers: Preparation, functionalization and biomedical application
Tian, H., Tang, Z., Zhuang, X., Chen, X., & Jing, X. (2012) · Progress in Polymer Science · doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2011.06.004 · Cited by 1,293
Gold Nanomaterials at Work in Biomedicine
Yang, X., Yang, M., Pang, B., Vara, M., & Xia, Y. (2015) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00193 · Cited by 1,162
The Smart Drug Delivery System and Its Clinical Potential
Liu, D., Yang, F., Xiong, F., & Gu, N. (2016) · Theranostics · doi:10.7150/thno.14858 · Cited by 1,066
Polymeric Nanoparticles for Drug Delivery: Recent Developments and Future Prospects
Begines, B., Ortiz, T., Pérez-Aranda, M., Martínez, G., Merinero, M., Argüelles-Arias, F., & Alcudia, A. (2020) · Nanomaterials · doi:10.3390/nano10071403 · Cited by 1,061
Computationally Guided Photothermal Tumor Therapy Using Long-Circulating Gold Nanorod Antennas
von Maltzahn, G., Park, J.-H., Agrawal, A., Bandaru, N. K., Das, S. K., Sailor, M. J., & Bhatia, S. N. (2009) · Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-08-4242 · Cited by 1,051
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, D., Park, S., Lee, J. H., Jeong, Y. Y., & Jon, S.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Chemical Society
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2007-05-27
- Volume
- 129
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 7661-7665
- ISSN
- 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5126
- OpenAlex
- W1963807187
- Cited by
- 876
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 30.17
- 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
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.