4.6 Review

Gas-stabilizing nanoparticles for ultrasound imaging and therapy of cancer

期刊

NANO CONVERGENCE
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1186/s40580-021-00287-2

关键词

Ultrasound imaging; Focused ultrasound; Gas-stabilizing nanoparticles; Tumor ablation; Drug delivery; Sonodynamic therapy; Cancer theranostics

资金

  1. Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research (CEDAR) center at Oregon Health & Science University's Knight Cancer Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ultrasound has long been used in the clinic for cancer detection and therapy, with stabilized fluorocarbon microbubbles as contrast agents. However, the limitations of microbubbles in terms of size, stability, and cavitation activity have led to the exploration of gas-stabilizing nanoparticles as an alternative material for improved methods in molecular ultrasound imaging and cancer therapy.
The use of ultrasound in the clinic has been long established for cancer detection and image-guided tissue biopsies. In addition, ultrasound-based methods have been widely explored to develop more effective cancer therapies such as localized drug delivery, sonodynamic therapy, and focused ultrasound surgery. Stabilized fluorocarbon microbubbles have been in use as contrast agents for ultrasound imaging in the clinic for several decades. It is also known that microbubble cavitation could generate thermal, mechanical, and chemical effects in the tissue to improve ultrasound-based therapies. However, the large size, poor stability, and short-term cavitation activity of microbubbles limit their applications in cancer imaging and therapy. This review will focus on an alternative type of ultrasound responsive material; gas-stabilizing nanoparticles, which can address the limitations of microbubbles with their nanoscale size, robustness, and high cavitation activity. This review will be of interest to researchers who wish to explore new agents to develop improved methods for molecular ultrasound imaging and therapy of cancer.

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

4.6
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