Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23738667›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic delivery2013

Therapeutic nanomedicine for brain cancer.

Stephany Y Tzeng, Jordan J Green

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic delivery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
–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

46 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Nano-Based Technology in Glioblastoma.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Nano-inspired smart medicines targeting brain cancer: diagnosis and treatment.Journal of biological inorganic chemistry : JBIC : a publication of the Society of Biological Inorganic Chemistry · 2023
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Carbon Dots: An Innovative Tool for Drug Delivery in Brain Tumors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Therapeutic potential ofAmerican journal of neurodegenerative disease · 2021
    Article
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

2 authors.

Stephany Y TzengDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA.
Jordan J Green

Funding

Gene Delivery Nanoparticles to Treat GlioblastomaR01EB016721 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GREEN, JORDAN · 2013 to 2017
$1.9M
NIBIB NIH HHS 1R01EB016721NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB016721
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malignant brain cancer treatment is limited by a number of barriers, including the blood-brain barrier, transport within the brain interstitium, difficulties in delivering therapeutics specifically to tumor cells, the highly invasive quality of gliomas and drug resistance. As a result, the prognosis for patients with high-grade gliomas is poor and has improved little in recent years. Nanomedicine approaches have been developed in the laboratory, with some technologies being translated to the clinic, in order to address these needs. This review discusses the obstacles to effective treatment that are currently faced in the field, as well as various nanomedicine techniques that have been used or are being explored to overcome them, with a focus on liposomal and polymeric nanoparticles.

Indexed as

AnimalsBlood-Brain BarrierBrainBrain NeoplasmsDiffusionDrug Delivery SystemsGenetic TherapyGliomaHumansLiposomesNanomedicineNanoparticlesPermeabilityPolymersLiposomesPolymers

Identifiers

PMID23738667
PMCPMC3838881

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.