2012
DOI: 10.1002/smll.201102595
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Small‐Sized Carbon Nanohorns Enabling Cellular Uptake Control

Abstract: Carbon nanotubes perform well in preclinical tests for drug delivery and diagnostic imaging, but controlling the size at less than 100 nm to avoid nonspecific uptake by reticuloendothelial systems while targeting delivery to cells of interest via receptor-mediated endocytosis is difficult, which currently limits their widespread use. Herein, 20-50-nm graphene tubules, small-sized single-walled carbon nanohorns (S-SWNHs), are obtained with a yield of 20% or higher by an oxidative exfoliation of 100 nm pristine … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
41
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
1
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…7 The previous studies on the interaction between SWCNHs and cells have mostly emphasized on cellular uptake and intracellular trafficking, but seldom on epithelial cells, although epithelial cell membranes as the typical biological barrier constitute the prime obstacle for the transport of therapeutic agents. 14,15 In light of these previous findings, this study focused on characterizing the effect of this novel material on the polar epithelium and examining its ability to modulate transcellular transport and its potential in drug delivery.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…7 The previous studies on the interaction between SWCNHs and cells have mostly emphasized on cellular uptake and intracellular trafficking, but seldom on epithelial cells, although epithelial cell membranes as the typical biological barrier constitute the prime obstacle for the transport of therapeutic agents. 14,15 In light of these previous findings, this study focused on characterizing the effect of this novel material on the polar epithelium and examining its ability to modulate transcellular transport and its potential in drug delivery.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Until now, studies at the cellular level on SWCNHs were mainly focused on the interaction between SWCNHs and non-polarized cells particularly macrophages, and have mostly emphasized on the cellular uptake and intracellular trafficking, but seldom on transportation. [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] It is worth noting that, depending on the routes of administration, nanocarriers may have to cross different physiological barriers in their journey towards their target. 22,23 These barriers are mainly polarized epithelia, such as the gastrointestinal tract, the lungs, and the blood-brain barrier.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…107,108 Smaller sized SWNH aggregates, which can be obtained by adjusting the conditions of synthesis or applying postsynthetic separation techniques, could possibly be used to overcome these problems. 109,110 NANODIAMONDS AND POROUS CARBON NANOSPHERES FOR DRUG DELIVERY Nanodiamonds for anticancer drug delivery Nanodiamonds were first produced decades ago, but they did not gain attention as novel agents for biological applications, such as drug delivery, biolabeling and sensing, until recently. 16,17 As this review focuses on nano-therapeutic applications, we will only discuss studies that apply nanodiamonds for the cellular delivery of various therapeutic agents.…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in our experiments, DPEG-coated CNHs agglomerated after the injection into mice and were captured by macrophages or vascular endothelial cells inside the tumor blood vessels. In the previous in vitro study, smaller-sized (20-50 nm) CNHs with DPEG coating preclude their uptake by RAW 264.7 macrophage cells, 27 thus indicating a possibility that the smaller-sized CNHs with proper surface coating exit the blood vessels in tumor, which remains the challenge.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%