Hybrid nanoparticles (HNPs) have shown huge potential as drug delivery vehicles for pancreatic cancer. Currently, the first line treatment, gemcitabine, is only effective in 23.8% of patients. To improve this, a thermally activated system was developed by introducing a linker between HNPs and gemcitabine. Whereby, heat generation resulting from laser irradiation of the HNPs promoted linker breakdown resulting in prodrug liberation. In vitro evaluation in pancreatic adenocarcinoma cells, showed the prodrug was 4.3 times less cytotoxic than gemcitabine, but exhibited 11-fold improvement in cellular uptake. Heat activation of the formulation led to a 56% rise in cytotoxicity causing it to outperform gemcitabine by 26%. In vivo the formulation outperformed free gemcitabine with a 62% reduction in tumor weight in pancreatic xenografts. This HNP formulation is the first of its kind and has displayed superior anti-cancer activity as compared to the current first line drug gemcitabine after heat mediated controlled release.

BackgroundDifferential choices of radiology subspecialties by radiology trainees can cause shortages in some subspecialties. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the relative preference of different radiology subspecialties and the influencing factors among radiology trainees in Saudi Arabia. MethodsAn online questionnaire was developed based on previous publications and was used to collect the data from radiology trainees in Saudi Arabia during August 2018. The relative importance of potential personal and work-related factors was assessed using Likert-scaled responses.ResultsA total of 105 radiology trainees were included in the current analysis. Approximately 64.8% of the trainees were males. A total of eight subspecialties were reported, with the most frequent being interventional radiology (20%), neuroradiology (19%), abdominal/gastrointestinal (15.2%), and musculoskeletal (14.3%). Personal factors that were reported as extremely or very important included strong personal interest (84.8%), successful/enjoyable rotation during training (84.8%), and intellectual challenge (76.2%). Work-related factors that were reported as extremely or very important included direct impact on patient care (84.8%), advanced or a variety of imaging modalities (81%), direct professional contact (77.1%), and favorable/flexibility of working hours and on-call commitments (77.1%). The subspecialty of interventional radiology was more frequently chosen by male trainees (p = 0.006), while the gynecological/breast subspecialty was exclusively chosen by female trainees (p < 0.001).ConclusionIn addition to gender-specific differences, we are reporting several important personal and professional factors that influence the choice of radiology subspecialty. These findings can potentially help the directors of radiology training in making evidence-based modifications to their residency programs to ensure the maintenance of a sufficient radiology workforce.

No abstract