Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 391

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Most Effective Gold Nanorod Size for Plasmonic Photothermal Therapy: Theory and In Vitro Experiments

Open access
Mackey, Megan A., Ali, Moustafa R. K., Austin, Lauren A., Near, Rachel D., El-Sayed, Mostafa A.·2014·The Journal of Physical Chemistry B

Abstract

The development of new and improved photothermal contrast agents for the successful treatment of cancer (or other diseases) via plasmonic photothermal therapy (PPTT) is a crucial part of the application of nanotechnology in medicine. Gold nanorods (AuNRs) have been found to be the most effective photothermal contrast agents, both in vitro and in vivo. Therefore, determining the optimum AuNR size needed for applications in PPTT is of great interest. In the present work, we utilized theoretical calculations as well as experimental techniques in vitro to determine this optimum AuNR size by comparing plasmonic properties and the efficacy as photothermal contrast agents of three different sizes of AuNRs. Our theoretical calculations showed that the contribution of absorbance to the total extinction, the electric field, and the distance at which this field extends away from the nanoparticle surface all govern the effectiveness of the amount of heat these particles generate upon NIR laser irradiation. Comparing between three different AuNRs (38 × 11, 28 × 8, and 17 × 5 nm), we determined that the 28 × 8 nm AuNR is the most effective in plasmonic photothermal heat generation. These results encouraged us to carry out in vitro experiments to compare the PPTT efficacy of the different sized AuNRs. The 28 × 8 nm AuNR was found to be the most effective photothermal contrast agent for PPTT of human oral squamous cell carcinoma. This size AuNR has the best compromise between the total amount of light absorbed and the fraction of which is converted to heat. In addition, the distance at which the electric field extends from the particle surface is most ideal for this size AuNR, as it is sufficient to allow for coupling between the fields of adjacent particles in solution (i.e., particle aggregates), resulting in effective heating in solution.

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/jp409298f

Cites

43 of 43 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 43 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Mackey, M. A., Ali, M. R. K., Austin, L. A., Near, R. D., & El-Sayed, M. A.
Venue
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
Published
2014-01-23
Volume
118
Issue
5
Pages
1319-1326
ISSN
  • 1520-5207 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6106
OpenAlex
W2315279405
Cited by
391
References
43
FWCI
18.21
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

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.