Lauren Arms, Doug W. Smith, Jamie Flynn, William Palmer, Antony Martin, Ameha Woldu, Susan Hua
Abstract
Nanomedicines are typically submicrometer-sized carrier materials (nanoparticles) encapsulating therapeutic and/or imaging compounds that are used for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of diseases. They are increasingly being used to overcome biological barriers in the body to improve the way we deliver compounds to specific tissues and organs. Nanomedicine technology aims to improve the balance between the efficacy and the toxicity of therapeutic compounds. Nanoparticles, one of the key technologies of nanomedicine, can exhibit a combination of physical, chemical and biological characteristics that determine their in vivo behavior. A key component in the translational assessment of nanomedicines is determining the biodistribution of the nanoparticles following in vivo administration in animals and humans. There are a range of techniques available for evaluating nanoparticle biodistribution, including histology, electron microscopy, liquid scintillation counting (LSC), indirectly measuring drug concentrations, in vivo optical imaging, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and nuclear medicine imaging. Each technique has its own advantages and limitations, as well as capabilities for assessing real-time, whole-organ and cellular accumulation. This review will address the principles and methodology of each technique and their advantages and limitations for evaluating in vivo biodistribution of nanoparticles.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
19
9%
Engineering
17
8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
10
5%
Other
36
18%
Unknown
76
37%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,016,514
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#5,344
of 16,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,637
of 331,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#129
of 391 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,457 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,095 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 391 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
