4.8 Review

Advances in oxidase-mimicking nanozymes: Classification, activity regulation and biomedical applications

期刊

NANO TODAY
卷 37, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nantod.2021.101076

关键词

Nanomaterials; Oxidase mimics; Classification; Activity regulation; Biomedical applications

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [21906110]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20170353]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019M651950, 2020T130458]
  4. Collaborative Innovation Center of Radiological Medicine of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article introduces the classification, catalytic mechanisms, and methods for regulating the activity of oxidase-mimicking nanozymes, discusses their potential applications in the biomedical field, and also points out the research opportunities and challenges in this area.
While oxidases play crucial roles in the cell metabolism by efficient and selective utilization of O-2, the practical applications of natural oxidases are limited due to their intrinsic shortcomings (high cost in purification and poor stability). Recently, great varieties of engineered nanostructures have been demonstrated to display oxidase-mimetic activity, which can serve as ideal candidates for oxidase-mimicking nanozymes. In view of the significant progress of nanozymes, we, in this review, systematically illustrate the classification of oxidase-mimicking nanozymes in terms of the acting group of representative substrates and discuss their possible catalytic mechanisms. We also summary the activity modulation of oxidase-mimicking nanozymes by tuning the physicochemical property of nanomaterials and surrounding environments, as well as their potential biomedical applications in biosensing, antibacteria and cancer treatment. Finally, the current opportunities and challenges are discussed to stimulate the research of understanding and development of nanozymes. (C) 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据