Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22212900›Full record

ReviewAdvanced drug delivery reviews2012

Oral drug delivery with polymeric nanoparticles: the gastrointestinal mucus barriers.

Laura M Ensign, Richard Cone, Justin Hanes

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced drug delivery reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 419 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
419citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

419 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Nanotechnology for the treatment of iron deficiency anemia: an in vivo review.Biometals : an international journal on the role of metal ions in biology, biochemistry, and medicine · 2026
    Review
  4. From triggers to interfaces: polymer-stabilized nano-co-crystals for robust mesalazine delivery in UC.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Tracing theEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2026
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

359 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Laura M EnsignCenter for Nanomedicine at the Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA. lensign@jhu.edu
Richard Cone
Justin Hanes

Funding

Pathogen trapping by genital mucus secretionsR01HD062844 · NICHD · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CONE, RICHARD, HANES, JUSTIN S. · 2010 to 2014
$1.6M
Mucus-penetrating nanoparticles for sustained microbicide deliveryR33AI079740 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HANES, JUSTIN S. · 2010 to 2012
$1.4M
Mucus Penetrating Particles for Rectal MicrobicidesR33AI094519 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CONE, RICHARD, HANES, JUSTIN S. · 2013 to 2015
$1.4M
Mucus Penetrating Particles for Rectal MicrobicidesR21AI094519 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CONE, RICHARD, HANES, JUSTIN S. · 2011 to 2012
$440k
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNIAID NIH HHS 5R21AI094519NIAID NIH HHS 5R33AI079740NIAID NIH HHS R21 AI094519NIAID NIH HHS R33 AI079740NIAID NIH HHS R33 AI094519NICHD NIH HHS 5R01HD062844NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD062844
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oral delivery is the most common method for drug administration. However, poor solubility, stability, and bioavailability of many drugs make achieving therapeutic levels via the gastrointestinal (GI) tract challenging. Drug delivery must overcome numerous hurdles, including the acidic gastric environment and the continuous secretion of mucus that protects the GI tract. Nanoparticle drug carriers that can shield drugs from degradation and deliver them to intended sites within the GI tract may enable more efficient and sustained drug delivery. However, the rapid secretion and shedding of GI tract mucus can significantly limit the effectiveness of nanoparticle drug delivery systems. Many types of nanoparticles are efficiently trapped in and rapidly removed by mucus, making controlled release in the GI tract difficult. This review addresses the protective barrier properties of mucus secretions, how mucus affects the fate of orally administered nanoparticles, and recent developments in nanoparticles engineered to penetrate the mucus barrier.

Indexed as

Drug Delivery SystemsNanoparticlesAdministration, OralAnimalsBiological AvailabilityDrug DesignDrug StabilityGastric MucosaGastrointestinal TractHumansIntestinal MucosaPolymersSolubilityPolymers

Identifiers

PMID22212900
PMCPMC3322271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.