ReviewJournal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society2013
Understanding the correlation between in vitro and in vivo immunotoxicity tests for nanomedicines.
Review in Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 124 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
124 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dual-targeted nanotechnology for gynaecological cancers: a comprehensive review of mechanisms and clinical potential.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Review
- Nanoparticle Engineering in Modern Vaccinology: From Delivery Platforms to Immune-Programming Architectures.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Anti-NRP1 peptide-engineered ROS/pH dual-responsive nanoparticles for Alpelisib delivery regulate Sema3A-NRP1/PI3K-AKT signaling to balance oxidative stress and inhibit angiogenesis in endometriosis.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Article
- Rabbit Immune Cell Function: In Vitro Assays for Immunological Assessment Studies Using Flow Cytometry.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2026Article
- Manganese-Templated Nontrivial Structures for MRI and Therapy.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2026Article
- N-Succinylated Canonical vs. Dehydropeptides: Contrasting Self-Assembly Pathways and Hydrogel Properties.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Plant-Based Biomaterials as Bio-Instructive Immunomodulators: Design Principles, Mechanisms, and Translational Challenges.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- From Polyphenols to Prodrugs: Bridging the Blood-Brain Barrier with Nanomedicine and Neurotherapeutics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- From Nanoparticle Design to Clinical Translation in Cancer Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- CD8a antibody-functionalized biomimetic red blood cell membrane ectosomes delivering C646 reverse CD8⁺ T Cell exhaustion via H3K18la histone delactylation in gastric cardia adenocarcinoma.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Article
- Advancements in Nanoparticle-Based Therapies for Breast Cancer: Current Trends and Future Prospects.International journal of breast cancer · 2026Review
- Enhancing the Safety of Nanoparticles in Medicine: Highlights of Progress and Critical Objectives.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- BaTiOPharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Charting new frontiers in nanoparticle immunotoxicity: A perspective on current, emerging, and future approaches.Biochemical and biophysical research communications · 2025Review
- When conventional approach in toxicity assays falls short for nanomedicines: a case study with nanoemulsions.Drug delivery and translational research · 2025Article
- Nucleic acid nanobiosystems for cancer theranostics: an overview of emerging trends and challenges.Nanomedicine (London, England) · 2025Review
- Nanostructured Lipoxin A4: Understanding Its Biological Behavior and Impact on Alzheimer's Disease (Proof of Concept).Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- The Toxicity of Lead and Lead-Free Perovskite Precursors and Nanocrystals to Human Cells and Aquatic Organisms.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
64 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Preclinical characterization of novel nanotechnology-based formulations is often challenged by physicochemical characteristics, sterility/sterilization issues, safety and efficacy. Such challenges are not unique to nanomedicine, as they are common in the development of small and macromolecular drugs. However, due to the lack of a general consensus on critical characterization parameters, a shortage of harmonized protocols to support testing, and the vast variety of engineered nanomaterials, the translation of nanomedicines into clinic is particularly complex. Understanding the immune compatibility of nanoformulations has been identified as one of the important factors in (pre)clinical development and requires reliable in vitro and in vivo immunotoxicity tests. The generally low sensitivity of standard in vivo toxicity tests to immunotoxicities, inter-species variability in the structure and function of the immune system, high costs and relatively low throughput of in vivo tests, and ethical concerns about animal use underscore the need for trustworthy in vitro assays. Here, we consider the correlation (or lack thereof) between in vitro and in vivo immunotoxicity tests as a mean to identify useful in vitro assays. We review literature examples and case studies from the experience of the NCI Nanotechnology Characterization Lab, and highlight assays where predictability has been demonstrated for a variety of nanomaterials and assays with high potential for predictability in vivo.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.