CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,823

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nanoparticle size and surface properties determine the protein corona with possible implications for biological impacts

Lundqvist, Martin, Stigler, Johannes, Elia, Giuliano, Lynch, Iseult, Cedervall, Tommy, Dawson, Kenneth A.·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0805135105
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Nanoparticles in a biological fluid (plasma, or otherwise) associate with a range of biopolymers, especially proteins, organized into the “protein corona” that is associated with the nanoparticle and continuously exchanging with the proteins in the environment. Methodologies to determine the corona and to understand its dependence on nanomaterial properties are likely to become important in bionanoscience. Here, we study the long-lived (“hard”) protein corona formed from human plasma for a range of nanoparticles that differ in surface properties and size. Six different polystyrene nanoparticles were studied: three different surface chemistries (plain PS, carboxyl-modified, and amine-modified) and two sizes of each (50 and 100 nm), enabling us to perform systematic studies of the effect of surface properties and size on the detailed protein coronas. Proteins in the corona that are conserved and unique across the nanoparticle types were identified and classified according to the protein functional properties. Remarkably, both size and surface properties were found to play a very significant role in determining the nanoparticle coronas on the different particles of identical materials. We comment on the future need for scientific understanding, characterization, and possibly some additional emphasis on standards for the surfaces of nanoparticles.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.0805135105

Cites

1 of 1 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

  • Shotgun proteomics implicates protease inhibition and complement activation in the antiinflammatory properties of HDL

    Vaisar, T., Pennathur, S., Green, P. S., Gharib, S. A., Hoofnagle, A. N., Cheung, M. C., Byun, J., Vuletic, S., Kassim, S., Singh, P., et al. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci26206 · Cited by 942 · cited 9×

    “The 50-nm amine-modified particles have the highest number of detected apolipoproteins, 9 of the 10 identified being associated with HDL, suggesting that 50-nm amine-modified particles associate with HDL. Apolipoprotein B-100 (the major protein in VLDL and LDL particles, but not HDL) (16) is associated with all 50-nm…”
    BackgroundInfluential

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. 10.1002/anie.200700465 · DOI
  2. 10.1073/pnas.0608582104 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1016/S0939-6411(02)00081-4 · DOI
  4. 10.1002/jbm.a.10371 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/S0378-5173(99)00432-9 · DOI
  6. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(19980305)39:3<478::AID-JBM19>3.0.CO;2-6 · DOI
  7. 10.1023/A:1012043131081 · DOI
  8. 10.1111/j.1365-2249.1990.tb05339.x · DOI
  9. 10.1074/mcp.R200007-MCP200 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1002/pmic.200401233 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2005.12.098 · DOI
  12. 10.1002/pmic.200401010 · DOI
  13. 10.1002/pmic.200300938 · DOI
  14. 10.1002/pmic.200600339 · DOI
  15. 10.1002/pmic.200500191 · DOI
  16. 10.1172/JCI31608 · DOI
  17. 10.1021/ac950914h · DOI
  18. 10.1021/ac00104a020 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Lundqvist, M., Stigler, J., Elia, G., Lynch, I., Cedervall, T., & Dawson, K. A.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-09-23
Volume
105
Issue
38
Pages
14265-14270
ISSN
  • 0027-8424
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.0805135105
Cited by
2,823
References
1
Language
en

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