Sex as an important factor in nanomedicine.
Journal
Nature communications
ISSN: 2041-1723
Titre abrégé: Nat Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101528555
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 05 2021
20 05 2021
Historique:
received:
19
08
2020
accepted:
01
04
2021
entrez:
21
5
2021
pubmed:
22
5
2021
medline:
2
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Nanomedicine has demonstrated substantial potential to improve the quality and efficacy of healthcare systems. Although the promise of nanomedicine to transform conventional medicine is evident, significant numbers of therapeutic nanomedicine products have failed in clinical trials. Most studies in nanomedicine have overlooked several important factors, including the significance of sex differences at various physiological levels. This report attempts to highlight the importance of sex in nanomedicine at cellular and molecular level. A more thorough consideration of sex physiology, among other critical variations (e.g., health status of individuals), would enable researchers to design and develop safer and more-efficient sex-specific diagnostic and therapeutic nanomedicine products.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34017011
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-23230-9
pii: 10.1038/s41467-021-23230-9
pmc: PMC8170671
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2984Références
Specification PA. Terminology for nanomaterials. British Standards Institute, London, (2007).
Kim, B. Y. S., Rutka, J. T. & Chan, W. C. W. Nanomedicine. N. Eng. J. Med. 363, 2434–2443 (2010).
doi: 10.1056/NEJMra0912273
Nanomedicine and the COVID-19 vaccines. Nat. Nanotechnol. 15, 963-963 (2020).
He, H., Liu, L., Morin, E. E., Liu, M. & Schwendeman, A. Survey of clinical translation of cancer nanomedicines - lessons learned from successes and failures. Acc. Chem. Res. 52, 2673–2683 (2019).
doi: 10.1021/acs.accounts.9b00228
Dawson K. A., Yan Y. Current understanding of biological identity at the nanoscale and future prospects. Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 229–242 (2021).
Mahmoudi, M. Debugging nano–bio interfaces: systematic strategies to accelerate clinical translation of nanotechnologies. Trends Biotechnol. 36, 755–769 (2018).
pubmed: 29559165
doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.02.014
Park, K. The beginning of the end of the nanomedicine hype. J. Control. Release 305, 221–222 (2019).
pubmed: 31170465
doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2019.05.044
Wilhelm, S. et al. Analysis of nanoparticle delivery to tumours. Nat. Rev. Mater. 1, 16014 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/natrevmats.2016.14
Lee, S. K. Sex as an important biological variable in biomedical research. BMB Rep. 51, 167 (2018).
pubmed: 29429452
pmcid: 5933211
doi: 10.5483/BMBRep.2018.51.4.034
Lloyd-Parry, O., Downing, C., Aleisaei, E., Jones, C. & Coward, K. Nanomedicine applications in women’s health: state of the art. Int. J. Nanomed. 13, 1963 (2018).
doi: 10.2147/IJN.S97572
Shah, K., McCormack, C. E. & Bradbury, N. A. Do you know the sex of your cells? Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 306, C3–C18 (2014).
pubmed: 24196532
doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.00281.2013
Chen, J. et al. Sex differences in the toxicity of polyethylene glycol-coated gold nanoparticles in mice. Int. J. Nanomed. 8, 2409 (2013).
Han, H.-Y. et al. Amorphous silica nanoparticle-induced pulmonary inflammatory response depends on particle size and is sex-specific in rats. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 390, 114890 (2020).
pubmed: 31972177
doi: 10.1016/j.taap.2020.114890
Freitas, R. A. Jr. What is nanomedicine? Nanomed.: NNBM 1, 2 (2005).
doi: 10.1016/j.nano.2004.11.003
Wagner, V., Dullaart, A., Bock, A.-K. & Zweck, A. The emerging nanomedicine landscape. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 1211–1217 (2006).
pubmed: 17033654
doi: 10.1038/nbt1006-1211
Saifi, M. A., Khan, W. & Godugu, C. Cytotoxicity of nanomaterials: using nanotoxicology to address the safety concerns of nanoparticles. Pharm. Nanotechnol. 6, 3–16 (2018).
pubmed: 29065848
doi: 10.2174/2211738505666171023152928
Serpooshan, V. et al. Effect of cell sex on uptake of nanoparticles: the overlooked factor at the nanobio interface. ACS Nano 12, 2253–2266 (2018).
pubmed: 29536733
doi: 10.1021/acsnano.7b06212
Monopoli, M. P., Åberg, C., Salvati, A. & Dawson, K. A. Biomolecular coronas provide the biological identity of nanosized materials. Nat. Nanotechnol. 7, 779–786 (2012).
pubmed: 23212421
doi: 10.1038/nnano.2012.207
Ma, Y. et al. Sex dependent effects of silver nanoparticles on the zebrafish gut microbiota. Environ. Sci. Nano 5, 740–751 (2018).
doi: 10.1039/C7EN00740J
Ober, C., Loisel, D. A. & Gilad, Y. Sex-specific genetic architecture of human disease. Nat. Rev. Gen. 9, 911–922 (2008).
doi: 10.1038/nrg2415
Jack, C. R. Jr. et al. Age-specific and sex-specific prevalence of cerebral β-amyloidosis, tauopathy, and neurodegeneration in cognitively unimpaired individuals aged 50–95 years: a cross-sectional study. Lancet Neurol. 16, 435–444 (2017).
pubmed: 28456479
pmcid: 5516534
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30077-7
Orton, S.-M. et al. Sex ratio of multiple sclerosis in Canada: a longitudinal study. Lancet Neurol. 5, 932–936 (2006).
pubmed: 17052660
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70581-6
Conforti, F. et al. Cancer immunotherapy efficacy and patients’ sex: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 19, 737–746 (2018).
pubmed: 29778737
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30261-4
Klein, S. L. & Flanagan, K. L. Sex differences in immune responses. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 16, 626 (2016).
pubmed: 27546235
doi: 10.1038/nri.2016.90
Arnold, A. P., Cassis, L. A., Eghbali, M., Reue, K. & Sandberg, K. Sex hormones and sex chromosomes cause sex differences in the development of cardiovascular diseases. Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 37, 746–756 (2017).
pubmed: 28279969
pmcid: 5437981
doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.116.307301
Norheim, F. et al. Gene-by-Sex interactions in mitochondrial functions and cardio-metabolic traits. Cell Metabol. 29, 932–949 (2019). e934.
doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2018.12.013
Arnold, A. P. & Disteche, C. M. Sexual inequality in the cancer cell. Cancer Res. 78, 5504–5505 (2018).
pubmed: 30275051
pmcid: 6204258
doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-2219
Li, C. H., Haider, S., Shiah, Y.-J., Thai, K. & Boutros, P. C. Sex differences in cancer driver genes and biomarkers. Cancer Res. 78, 5527–5537 (2018).
pubmed: 30275052
doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-0362
Lopes-Ramos, C. M. et al. Gene regulatory network analysis identifies sex-linked differences in colon cancer drug metabolism. Cancer Res. 78, 5538–5547 (2018).
pubmed: 30275053
pmcid: 6169995
doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-0454
Chaligné, R. & Heard, E. X-chromosome inactivation in development and cancer. FEBS Lett. 588, 2514–2522 (2014).
pubmed: 24937141
doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2014.06.023
Dunford, A. et al. Tumor-suppressor genes that escape from X-inactivation contribute to cancer sex bias. Nat. Gen. 49, 10 (2017).
doi: 10.1038/ng.3726
Laughlin, G., Barrett-Connor, E. & May, S. Sex-specific determinants of serum adiponectin in older adults: the role of endogenous sex hormones. Int. J. Obes. 31, 457–465 (2007).
doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803427
Gandhi, M., Aweeka, F., Greenblatt, R. M. & Blaschke, T. F. Sex differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 44, 499–523 (2004).
pubmed: 14744256
doi: 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.44.101802.121453
Schwartz, J. B. The influence of sex on pharmacokinetics. Clin. Pharm. 42, 107–121 (2003).
doi: 10.2165/00003088-200342020-00001
Ruddy, R. M., Adams, K. V. & Morshead, C. M. Age-and sex-dependent effects of metformin on neural precursor cells and cognitive recovery in a model of neonatal stroke. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax1912 (2019).
pubmed: 31535024
pmcid: 6739114
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aax1912
Faria, M. et al. Minimum information reporting in bio–nano experimental literature. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 777–785 (2018).
pubmed: 30190620
pmcid: 6150419
doi: 10.1038/s41565-018-0246-4
Kaddi, C. D., Phan, J. H. & Wang, M. D. Computational nanomedicine: modeling of nanoparticle-mediated hyperthermal cancer therapy. Nanomedicine 8, 1323–1333 (2013).
pubmed: 23914967
doi: 10.2217/nnm.13.117
Hajipour, M. J. et al. Personalized disease-specific protein corona influences the therapeutic impact of graphene oxide. Nanoscale 7, 8978–8994 (2015).
pubmed: 25920546
doi: 10.1039/C5NR00520E
Schottler, S., Klein, K., Landfester, K. & Mailander, V. Protein source and choice of anticoagulant decisively affect nanoparticle protein corona and cellular uptake. Nanoscale 8, 5526–5536 (2016).
pubmed: 26804616
doi: 10.1039/C5NR08196C
Bitounis, D. et al. Detection and analysis of nanoparticles in patients: a critical review of the status quo of clinical nanotoxicology. Biomaterials 76, 302–312 (2016).
pubmed: 26561929
doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.10.061
Strojan, K. et al. Dispersion of nanoparticles in different media importantly determines the composition of their protein corona. PloS One 12, e0169552 (2017).
pubmed: 28052135
pmcid: 5215476
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169552
Hajipour, M. J., Laurent, S., Aghaie, A., Rezaee, F. & Mahmoudi, M. Personalized protein coronas: a “key” factor at the nanobiointerface. Biomater. Sci. 2, 1210–1221 (2014).
pubmed: 32481892
doi: 10.1039/C4BM00131A
Caracciolo, G. et al. Disease-specific protein corona sensor arrays may have disease detection capacity. Nanoscale Horiz. 4, 1063–1076 (2019).
doi: 10.1039/C9NH00097F
Ramsey, J. M. et al. Molecular sex differences in human serum. PloS One 7, e51504 (2012).
pubmed: 23251558
pmcid: 3520798
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051504
Hashimoto, S., Miwa, M., Akasofu, K. & Nishida, E. Changes in 40 serum proteins of post-menopausal women. Maturitas 13, 23–33 (1991).
pubmed: 1861640
doi: 10.1016/0378-5122(91)90282-U
Bellei, E. et al. Proteomic serum profile in menstrual-related and post menopause migraine. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 184, 113165 (2020).
pubmed: 32113117
doi: 10.1016/j.jpba.2020.113165
Romero, R. et al. The maternal plasma proteome changes as a function of gestational age in normal pregnancy: a longitudinal study. Am. J. Bbst. Gynecol. 217, 67. e61–67. e21 (2017).
Phillips, R. J., Heesom, K. J., Trinder, J. & Bernal, A. L. Human maternal plasma proteomic changes with parturition. EuPA Open Proteom. 5, 10–20 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.euprot.2014.09.001
Scholl, P. et al. Maternal serum proteome changes between the first and third trimester of pregnancy in rural southern Nepal. Placenta 33, 424–432 (2012).
pubmed: 22385826
pmcid: 4703092
doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2012.02.009
Hadjidemetriou, M., Al-Ahmady, Z., Buggio, M., Swift, J. & Kostarelos, K. A novel scavenging tool for cancer biomarker discovery based on the blood-circulating nanoparticle protein corona. Biomaterials 188, 118–129 (2019).
pubmed: 30343255
doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.10.011
Hayashi, Y. et al. Female versus male biological identities of nanoparticles determine the interaction with immune cells in fish. Environ. Sci. Nano 4, 895–906 (2017).
doi: 10.1039/C7EN00071E
Babaei, F. et al. Novel blood collection method allows plasma proteome analysis from single zebrafish. J. Proteome Res. 12, 1580–1590 (2013).
pubmed: 23413775
doi: 10.1021/pr3009226
Li, C., Tan, X. F., Lim, T. K., Lin, Q. & Gong, Z. Comprehensive and quantitative proteomic analyses of zebrafish plasma reveals conserved protein profiles between genders and between zebrafish and human. Sci. Rep. 6, 24329 (2016).
pubmed: 27071722
pmcid: 4829857
doi: 10.1038/srep24329
Zhang, J. et al. Silver nanoparticles compromise female embryonic stem cell differentiation through disturbing X chromosome inactivation. ACS Nano 13, 2050–2061 (2019).
pubmed: 30650303
Schulz, E. G. X-chromosome dosage as a modulator of pluripotency, signalling and differentiation? Philost. T. R. Soc. B. 372, 20160366 (2017).
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0366
Borensztein, M. et al. Xist-dependent imprinted X inactivation and the early developmental consequences of its failure. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 226 (2017).
pubmed: 28134930
pmcid: 5337400
doi: 10.1038/nsmb.3365
Yue, M. et al. Xist RNA repeat E is essential for ASH2L recruitment to the inactive X and regulates histone modifications and escape gene expression. PLoS Gen. 13, e1006890 (2017).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006890
Gubbels Bupp, M. R., Potluri, T., Fink, A. L. & Klein, S. L. The confluence of sex hormones and aging on immunity. Front. Immunol. 9, 1269 (2018).
pubmed: 29915601
pmcid: 5994698
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01269
Taneja, V. Sex hormones determine immune response. Front. Immunol. 9, 1931 (2018).
pubmed: 30210492
pmcid: 6119719
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01931
Carey, M. A. et al. The impact of sex and sex hormones on lung physiology and disease: lessons from animal studies. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol. 293, L272–L278 (2007).
pubmed: 17575008
doi: 10.1152/ajplung.00174.2007
Walter, J. et al. P2. 11-02 direct comparison of new solid nodules detected in women and men during incidence screening rounds of the NELSON trial. J. Thorac. Oncol. 13, S779 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2018.08.1348
Krumsiek, J. et al. Gender-specific pathway differences in the human serum metabolome. Metabolomics 11, 1815–1833 (2015).
pubmed: 26491425
pmcid: 4605991
doi: 10.1007/s11306-015-0829-0
Vignoli, A., Tenori, L., Luchinat, C. & Saccenti, E. Age and sex effects on plasma metabolite association networks in healthy subjects. J. Proteome Res. 17, 97–107 (2018).
pubmed: 29090929
doi: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.7b00404
Tavakol, M. et al. Disease-related metabolites affect protein–nanoparticle interactions. Nanoscale 10, 7108–7115 (2018).
pubmed: 29616243
doi: 10.1039/C7NR09502C
Spitzer, J. A. Gender differences in some host defense mechanisms. Lupus 8, 380–383 (1999).
pubmed: 10455517
doi: 10.1177/096120339900800510
Scotland, R. S., Stables, M. J., Madalli, S., Watson, P. & Gilroy, D. W. Sex differences in resident immune cell phenotype underlie more efficient acute inflammatory responses in female mice. Blood 118, 5918–5927 (2011).
pubmed: 21911834
pmcid: 5363818
doi: 10.1182/blood-2011-03-340281
Kadel, S. & Kovats, S. Sex hormones regulate innate immune cells and promote sex differences in respiratory virus infection. Front. Immunol. 9, 1653 (2018).
pubmed: 30079065
pmcid: 6062604
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01653
Fish, E. N. The X-files in immunity: sex-based differences predispose immune responses. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 8, 737–744 (2008).
pubmed: 18728636
pmcid: 7097214
doi: 10.1038/nri2394
Libert, C., Dejager, L. & Pinheiro, I. The X chromosome in immune functions: when a chromosome makes the difference. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 10, 594–604 (2010).
pubmed: 20651746
doi: 10.1038/nri2815
Carrel, L. & Willard, H. F. X-inactivation profile reveals extensive variability in X-linked gene expression in females. Nature 434, 400–404 (2005).
pubmed: 15772666
doi: 10.1038/nature03479
Yang, W. et al. Sex differences in GBM revealed by analysis of patient imaging, transcriptome, and survival data. Sci. Transl. Med. 11, eaao5253 (2019).
pubmed: 30602536
pmcid: 6502224
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aao5253
Botticelli, A. et al. The sexist behaviour of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer therapy? Oncotarget 8, 99336 (2017).
pubmed: 29245905
pmcid: 5725096
doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.22242
Pardoll, D. M. The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Rev.Cancer 12, 252–264 (2012).
pubmed: 22437870
pmcid: 4856023
doi: 10.1038/nrc3239
Bayry, J. CTLA-4: a key protein in autoimmunity. Nat. Rev. Rheumatol. 5, 244–245 (2009).
pubmed: 19412189
doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2009.77
Goldberg, M. S. Improving cancer immunotherapy through nanotechnology. Nature Rev. Cancer 19, 587–602 (2019).
pubmed: 31492927
Caetano, M. S. et al. Sex specific function of epithelial STAT3 signaling in pathogenesis of K-ras mutant lung cancer. Nat. Commun. 9, 1–11 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-07042-y
Ye, Y. et al. Sex-associated molecular differences for cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Commun. 11, 1–8 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15679-x
Zanganeh, S. et al. Iron oxide nanoparticles inhibit tumour growth by inducing pro-inflammatory macrophage polarization in tumour tissues. Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 986–994 (2016).
pubmed: 27668795
pmcid: 5198777
doi: 10.1038/nnano.2016.168
Torcia, M. G. et al. Sex differences in the response to viral infections: TLR8 and TLR9 ligand stimulation induce higher IL10 production in males. PloS ONE 7, e39853 (2012).
pubmed: 22768144
pmcid: 3387221
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0039853
Schoots, M. H., Gordijn, S. J., Scherjon, S. A., van Goor, H. & Hillebrands, J.-L. Oxidative stress in placental pathology. Placenta 69, 153–161 (2018).
pubmed: 29622278
doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2018.03.003
Ganguly, E. et al. Sex-specific effects of nanoparticle-encapsulated MitoQ (nMitoQ) delivery to the placenta in a rat model of fetal hypoxia. Front. Physiol. 10, 562 (2019).
pubmed: 31178743
pmcid: 6543892
doi: 10.3389/fphys.2019.00562
Regitz‐Zagrosek, V. Sex and gender differences in health. EMBO Rep. 13, 596–603 (2012).
pubmed: 22699937
pmcid: 3388783
doi: 10.1038/embor.2012.87
Amur, S., Parekh, A. & Mummaneni, P. Sex differences and genomics in autoimmune diseases. J. Autoimmun. 38, J254–J265 (2012).
pubmed: 22204900
doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2011.12.001
Dorak, M. T. & Karpuzoglu, E. Gender differences in cancer susceptibility: an inadequately addressed issue. Front. Gen. 3, 268 (2012).
Pollitzer, E. Cell sex matters. Nature 500, 23–24 (2013).
pubmed: 23903733
doi: 10.1038/500023a
Clayton, J. A. & Collins, F. S. Policy: NIH to balance sex in cell and animal studies. Nat. N. 509, 282 (2014).
doi: 10.1038/509282a
InanlooRahatloo, K. et al. Sex-based differences in myocardial gene expression in recently deceased organ donors with no prior cardiovascular disease. PloS ONE 12, e0183874 (2017).
pubmed: 28850583
pmcid: 5574577
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183874
Babiker, F. A. et al. Estrogenic hormone action in the heart: regulatory network and function. Cardiovas. Res. 53, 709–719 (2002).
doi: 10.1016/S0008-6363(01)00526-0
Du, X.-J. Gender modulates cardiac phenotype development in genetically modified mice. Cardiovas. Res. 63, 510–519 (2004).
doi: 10.1016/j.cardiores.2004.03.027
Dormont, F., Varna, M. & Couvreur, P. Nanoplumbers: biomaterials to fight cardiovascular diseases. Mater. Today 21, 122–143 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.mattod.2017.07.008
Mahmoudi, M. et al. Multiscale technologies for treatment of ischemic cardiomyopathy. Nat. Nanotechnol. 12, 845 (2017).
pubmed: 28875984
pmcid: 5717755
doi: 10.1038/nnano.2017.167
Lau, E. S. et al. Sex differences in circulating biomarkers of cardiovascular disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 74, 1543–1553 (2019).
pubmed: 31537263
pmcid: 6756178
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.06.077
Kazemian, N., Mahmoudi, M., Halperin, F., Wu, J. C. & Pakpour, S. Gut microbiota and cardiovascular disease: opportunities and challenges. Microbiome 8, 36 (2020).
pubmed: 32169105
pmcid: 7071638
doi: 10.1186/s40168-020-00821-0
Markle, J. G. et al. Sex differences in the gut microbiome drive hormone-dependent regulation of autoimmunity. Science 339, 1084–1088 (2013).
pubmed: 23328391
doi: 10.1126/science.1233521
O’Connor, C. A., Cernak, I. & Vink, R. Both estrogen and progesterone attenuate edema formation following diffuse traumatic brain injury in rats. Brain Res. 1062, 171–174 (2005).
pubmed: 16256079
doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2005.09.011
Bharadwaj V. N., et al. Nanoparticle delivery precision based on sex-dependent opening of the blood–brain barrier after brain injury. In: 42nd Society for Biomaterials Annual Meeting and Exposition 2019: The Pinnacle of Biomaterials Innovation and Excellence). Society for Biomaterials (2019).
Bharadwaj, V. N. et al. Sex-dependent macromolecule and nanoparticle delivery in experimental brain injury. Tissue Eng. A 26, 688–701 (2020).
doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2020.0040
Asai, H. et al. Depletion of microglia and inhibition of exosome synthesis halt tau propagation. Nat. Neurosci. 18, 1584 (2015).
pubmed: 26436904
pmcid: 4694577
doi: 10.1038/nn.4132
Kettenmann, H., Kirchhoff, F. & Verkhratsky, A. Microglia: new roles for the synaptic stripper. Neuron 77, 10–18 (2013).
pubmed: 23312512
doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.023
Schwarz, J. M., Sholar, P. W. & Bilbo, S. D. Sex differences in microglial colonization of the developing rat brain. J. Neurochem. 120, 948–963 (2012).
pubmed: 22182318
pmcid: 3296888
Kodama, L. & Gan, L. Do microglial sex differences contribute to sex differences in neurodegenerative diseases? Trends Mol. Med. 25, 741–749 (2019).
pubmed: 31171460
doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2019.05.001
Oveisgharan, S. et al. Sex differences in Alzheimer’s disease and common neuropathologies of aging. Acta Neuropathol. 136, 887–900 (2018).
pubmed: 30334074
pmcid: 6279593
doi: 10.1007/s00401-018-1920-1
Curtis, A. F. et al. Sex differences in the prevalence of genetic mutations in FTD and ALS: A meta-analysis. Neurology 89, 1633–1642 (2017).
pubmed: 28916533
pmcid: 5634668
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000004494
Augustine, E. F. et al. Sex differences in clinical features of early, treated Parkinson’s disease. PloS ONE 10, e0133002 (2015).
pubmed: 26171861
pmcid: 4501841
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133002
McCombe, P. A. & Henderson, R. D. Effects of gender in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Gend. Med. 7, 557–570 (2010).
pubmed: 21195356
doi: 10.1016/j.genm.2010.11.010
Yanguas-Casás, N. Physiological sex differences in microglia and their relevance in neurological disorders. Neuroimmunol. Neuroinflam. 7, 13–22 (2020).
Witt, E. D. Puberty, hormones, and sex differences in alcohol abuse and dependence. Neurotoxicol. Teratol. 29, 81–95 (2007).
pubmed: 17174531
doi: 10.1016/j.ntt.2006.10.013
Burger, H. G., Dudley, E. C., Robertson, D. M. & Dennerstein, L. Hormonal changes in the menopause transition. Rec. Prog. Horm. Res. 57, 257–276 (2002).
pubmed: 12017547
doi: 10.1210/rp.57.1.257
Park, S.-J., Jeong, S.-Y. & Kim, H. J. Y chromosome loss and other genomic alterations in hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines analyzed by CGH and CGH array. Cancer Gen. Cytogen. 166, 56–64 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.cancergencyto.2005.08.022
Sheibani, S. et al. Nanoscale characterization of the biomolecular corona on the surface of polystyrene nanoparticles by cryo-electron microscopy, cryo-electron tomography, and image simulation. Nat. Commun. 12, 573 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-20884-9
Lundqvist, M. & Cedervall, T. Three decades of research about the corona around nanoparticles: lessons learned and where to go now. Small 16, 2000892 (2020).
doi: 10.1002/smll.202000892
Langevin, D. et al. Inter-laboratory comparison of nanoparticle size measurements using dynamic light scattering and differential centrifugal sedimentation. NanoImpact 10, 97–107 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.impact.2017.12.004
Polack, F. P. et al. Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine. New England Journal of Medicine 383, 2603–2615 (2020).
Baden, L. R. et al. Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine. New England Journal of Medicine 384, 403–416 (2020).
Franco, A., Malhotra, N. & Simonovits, G. Publication bias in the social sciences: unlocking the file drawer. Science 345, 1502–1505 (2014).
pubmed: 25170047
doi: 10.1126/science.1255484
Rosenberg, M. S. The file-drawer problem revisited: a general weighted method for calculating fail-safe numbers in meta-analysis. Evolution 59, 464–468 (2005).
pubmed: 15807430
Joober, R., Schmitz, N., Annable, L. & Boksa, P. Publication bias: what are the challenges and can they be overcome? J. Psych. Neurosci. JPN 37, 149 (2012).
doi: 10.1503/jpn.120065
Young, S. S., Bang, H. & Kennedy, D. The file-drawer problem, revisited [3] (multiple letters). Science 306, 1133–1134 (2004).
pubmed: 15539586
doi: 10.1126/science.306.5699.1133d
Khushf, G. Upstream ethics in nanomedicine: A call for research. Nanomedicine 2, 511–521 (2007).
pubmed: 17716134
doi: 10.2217/17435889.2.4.511
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A. & Matthews, D. R. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337, 867–872 (1991).
pubmed: 1672966
doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-Y
Begg, C. B. & Berlin, J. A. Publication bias: a problem in interpreting medical data. J. R. Stat. Soc. A 151, 419–445 (1988).
doi: 10.2307/2982993
Berlin, J. A., Begg, C. B. & Louis, T. A. An assessment of publication bias using a sample of published clinical trials. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 84, 381–392 (1989).
doi: 10.1080/01621459.1989.10478782
McAuley, L., Tugwell, P. & Moher, D. Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 356, 1228–1231 (2000).
pubmed: 11072941
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02786-0
Ashkarran A. A., Swann J., Hollis L., Mahmoudi M. The file drawer problem in nanomedicine. Trends Biotechnol. (2021).
Pardue M.-L., Wizemann T. M. Exploring the biological contributions to human health: does sex matter?. Committee on understanding the biology of sex and gender differences. 39, 425–427 (2021).
Mahmoudi, M. & Keashly, L. Filling the space: a framework for coordinated global actions to diminish academic bullying. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 60, 3338–3344 (2021).
doi: 10.1002/anie.202009270
Lobo R. Menopause: endocrinology, consequences of estrogen deficiency, effects of hormone replacement therapy, treatment regimens. Comprehensive Gyncology 5th edn (Mosby Elsevier, 1039–1071 2007).
Lobo R. Primary and secondary amenorrhea and precocious puberty: etiology, diagnostic evaluation, management. Comprehensive Gynecology 5th edn (Mosby, 2007).
Melmed S., Polonsky K. S., Larsen P. R., Kronenberg H. M. Williams Textbook of Endocrinology E-Book. (Elsevier Health Sciences, 2015).
https://www.abim.org/~/media/ABIM%20Public/Files/pdf/exam/laboratory-reference-ranges.pdf .