The DOI matches its Crossref record.
True
Open accessAbstract
Molecular charge is one of the main determinants of transvascular transport. There are, however, no data available on the effect of molecular charge on microvascular permeability of macromolecules in solid tumours. To this end, we measured tumour microvascular permeability to different proteins having similar size but different charge. Measurements were performed in the human colon adenocarcinoma LS174T transplanted in transparent dorsal skinfold chambers in severe combined immunodeficient (SCID) mice. Bovine serum albumin (BSA) and IgG were fluorescently labelled and were either cationized by conjugation with hexamethylenediamine or anionized by succinylation. The molecules were injected i.v. and the fluorescence in tumour tissue was quantified by intravital fluorescence microscopy. The fluorescence intensity and pharmacokinetic data were used to calculate the microvascular permeability. We found that tumour vascular permeability of cationized BSA (pI-range: 8.6-9.1) and IgG (pI: 8.6-9.3) was more than two-fold higher (4.25 and 4.65x10(-7) cm s(-1)) than that of the anionized BSA (pI approximately 2.0) and IgG (pI: 3.0-3.9; 1.11 and 1.93x10(-7) cm s(-1), respectively). Our results indicate that positively charged molecules extravasate faster in solid tumours compared to the similar-sized compounds with neutral or negative charges. However, the plasma clearance of cationic molecules was approximately 2x faster than that of anionic ones, indicating that the modification of proteins enhances drug delivery to normal organs as well. Therefore, caution should be exercised when such a strategy is used to improve drug and gene delivery to solid tumours.
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
Cited by
Cancer nanotechnology: opportunities and challenges
Ferrari, M. (2005) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1566 · Cited by 4,558
Delivering nanomedicine to solid tumors
Jain, R. K., & Stylianopoulos, T. (2010) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.139 · Cited by 3,180
Weissleder, R., & Mahmood, U. (2001) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.219.2.r01ma19316 · Cited by 1,315
Ntziachristos, V., Bremer, C., & Weissleder, R. (2003) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-002-1524-x · Cited by 982
Duan, X., & Li, Y. (2013) · Small · doi:10.1002/smll.201201390 · Cited by 926
Metadata
- Venue
- British Journal of Cancer
- Published
- 2000
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1513-1518
- ISSN
- 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-1827
- OpenAlex
- W1827539236
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- fr
- 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: True. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1054/bjoc.1999.1171
- The paper
- True. (2000). British Journal of Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.1999.1171
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.