The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The role of surface charge in cellular uptake and cytotoxicity of medical nanoparticles
Open accessAbstract
Many types of nanoparticles (NPs) are tested for use in medical products, particularly in imaging and gene and drug delivery. For these applications, cellular uptake is usually a prerequisite and is governed in addition to size by surface characteristics such as hydrophobicity and charge. Although positive charge appears to improve the efficacy of imaging, gene transfer, and drug delivery, a higher cytotoxicity of such constructs has been reported. This review summarizes findings on the role of surface charge on cytotoxicity in general, action on specific cellular targets, modes of toxic action, cellular uptake, and intracellular localization of NPs. Effects of serum and intercell type differences are addressed. Cationic NPs cause more pronounced disruption of plasma-membrane integrity, stronger mitochondrial and lysosomal damage, and a higher number of autophagosomes than anionic NPs. In general, nonphagocytic cells ingest cationic NPs to a higher extent, but charge density and hydrophobicity are equally important; phagocytic cells preferentially take up anionic NPs. Cells do not use different uptake routes for cationic and anionic NPs, but high uptake rates are usually linked to greater biological effects. The different uptake preferences of phagocytic and nonphagocytic cells for cationic and anionic NPs may influence the efficacy and selectivity of NPs for drug delivery and 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
Doherty, G. J., & McMahon, H. T. (2009) · Annual Review of Biochemistry · doi:10.1146/annurev.biochem.78.081307.110540 · Cited by 3,075
Sahay, G., Alakhova, D. Y., & Kabanov, A. V. (2010) · Journal of Controlled Release · doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2010.01.036 · Cited by 2,181
Yin Win, K., & Feng, S.-S. (2005) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.07.050 · Cited by 1,452
Harush-Frenkel, O., Rozentur, E., Benita, S., & Altschuler, Y. (2008) · Biomacromolecules · doi:10.1021/bm700535p · Cited by 405
Ryman-Rasmussen, J. P., Riviere, J. E., & Monteiro-Riviere, N. A. (2007) · Journal of Investigative Dermatology · doi:10.1038/sj.jid.5700508 · Cited by 357
Cited by
DLS and zeta potential – What they are and what they are not?
Bhattacharjee, S. (2016) · Journal of Controlled Release · doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.06.017 · Cited by 4,702
Emergence of Nanoplastic in the Environment and Possible Impact on Human Health
Lehner, R., Weder, C., Petri-Fink, A., & Rothen-Rutishauser, B. (2019) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.8b05512 · Cited by 1,242
The plastic brain: neurotoxicity of micro- and nanoplastics
Prüst, M., Meijer, J., & Westerink, R. H. S. (2020) · Particle and Fibre Toxicology · doi:10.1186/s12989-020-00358-y · Cited by 811
Della Torre, C., Bergami, E., Salvati, A., Faleri, C., Cirino, P., Dawson, K. A., & Corsi, I. (2014) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es502569w · Cited by 632
Micro- and nanoplastic induced cellular toxicity in mammals: A review
Banerjee, A., & Shelver, W. L. (2021) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142518 · Cited by 492
Metadata
- Authors
- Fröhlich, E.
- Venue
- International Journal of Nanomedicine
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-11
- Volume
- 7
- Pages
- 5577
- ISSN
- 1176-9114 (ISSN-L)
- 1178-2013
- OpenAlex
- W2027876233
- Cited by
- 2,484
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 23.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: The role of surface charge in cellular uptake and cytotoxicity of medical nanoparticles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2147/ijn.s36111
- The paper
- Fröhlich, E. (2012). The role of surface charge in cellular uptake and cytotoxicity of medical nanoparticles. International Journal of Nanomedicine. https://doi.org/10.2147/ijn.s36111
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.