Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24270007›Full record

ReviewAdvanced drug delivery reviews2014

Cancer nanotechnology: the impact of passive and active targeting in the era of modern cancer biology.

Nicolas Bertrand, Jun Wu, Xiaoyang Xu, Nazila Kamaly, Omid C Farokhzad

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced drug delivery reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 896 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
896citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

896 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

836 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

5 authors.

Nicolas BertrandThe David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
Jun WuLaboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Xiaoyang XuThe David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA; Laboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Nazila KamalyLaboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Omid C FarokhzadLaboratory of Nanomedicine and Biomaterials, Department of Anesthesiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115, USA. Electronic address: ofarokhzad@zeus.bwh.harvard.edu.

Funding

The Development of Clinical Grade, Targeted Magnetic NanoparticlesU54CA151884 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI SHARP, PHILLIP A · 2010 to 2014
$11.3M
Development of FcRn-Targeted Nanoparticles for Efficient Oral Delivery of InsulinR01EB015419 · NIBIB · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI FAROKHZAD, OMID C, KARNIK, ROHIT N · 2012 to 2015
$2.8M
Sensitize Chemoresistant Breast Cancer by Nano-delivery of siRNA and CisplatinF32CA168163 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI XU, XIAOYANG · 2012 to 2014
$151k
CIHRNCI NIH HHS 1F32 CA168163-01NCI NIH HHS F32 CA168163NCI NIH HHS U54 CA151884NHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201000045CNIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB015419NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB015419-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer nanotherapeutics are progressing at a steady rate; research and development in the field has experienced an exponential growth since early 2000's. The path to the commercialization of oncology drugs is long and carries significant risk; however, there is considerable excitement that nanoparticle technologies may contribute to the success of cancer drug development. The pace at which pharmaceutical companies have formed partnerships to use proprietary nanoparticle technologies has considerably accelerated. It is now recognized that by enhancing the efficacy and/or tolerability of new drug candidates, nanotechnology can meaningfully contribute to create differentiated products and improve clinical outcome. This review describes the lessons learned since the commercialization of the first-generation nanomedicines including DOXIL® and Abraxane®. It explores our current understanding of targeted and non-targeted nanoparticles that are under various stages of development, including BIND-014 and MM-398. It highlights the opportunities and challenges faced by nanomedicines in contemporary oncology, where personalized medicine is increasingly the mainstay of cancer therapy. We revisit the fundamental concepts of enhanced permeability and retention effect (EPR) and explore the mechanisms proposed to enhance preferential "retention" in the tumor, whether using active targeting of nanoparticles, binding of drugs to their tumoral targets or the presence of tumor associated macrophages. The overall objective of this review is to enhance our understanding in the design and development of therapeutic nanoparticles for treatment of cancers.

Indexed as

Drug Delivery SystemsAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsHumansNanomedicineNanoparticlesNeoplasmsAntineoplastic AgentsActive targetingDrug deliveryEnhanced permeation and retention effectImagingNanomedicineNanoparticlesPatient enrichmentPersonalized medicineTumor microenvironmentVessel normalization

Identifiers

PMID24270007
PMCPMC4219254

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.