4.8 Review

Nanoparticles for improving cancer diagnosis

Journal

MATERIALS SCIENCE & ENGINEERING R-REPORTS
Volume 74, Issue 3, Pages 35-69

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.mser.2013.03.001

Keywords

Cancer diagnosis; Biomarkers; Nanotechnology; Nanomedicine; Bio-conjugation; Surface modification; Imaging

Funding

  1. NCI/NIH R00 grant [5R00CA153772]
  2. UGA startup grant
  3. Hong Kong Research Grants Council (RGC) General Research Funds (GRF) [CityU 112212]
  4. City University of Hong Kong Applied Research Grant (ARG) [9667066]
  5. Philbrook scholarship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite the progress in developing new therapeutic modalities, cancer remains one of the leading diseases causing human mortality. This is mainly attributed to the inability to diagnose tumors in their early stage. By the time the tumor is confirmed, the cancer may have already metastasized, thereby making therapies challenging or even impossible. It is therefore crucial to develop new or to improve existing diagnostic tools to enable diagnosis of cancer in its early or even pre-syndrome stage. The emergence of nanotechnology has provided such a possibility. Unique physical and physiochemical properties allow nanoparticles to be utilized as tags with excellent sensitivity. When coupled with the appropriate targeting molecules, nanoparticle-based probes can interact with a biological system and sense biological changes on the molecular level with unprecedented accuracy. In the past several years, much progress has been made in applying nanotechnology to clinical imaging and diagnostics, and interdisciplinary efforts have made an impact on clinical cancer management. This article aims to review the progress in this exciting area with emphases on the preparation and engineering techniques that have been developed to assemble smart nanoprobes. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available