Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24874289›Full record

ReviewJournal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society2014

State-of-the-art in design rules for drug delivery platforms: lessons learned from FDA-approved nanomedicines.

Charlene M Dawidczyk, Chloe Kim, Jea Ho Park, Luisa M Russell, Kwan Hyi Lee, Martin G Pomper, Peter C Searson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 170 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
170citing 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

170 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Targeting breast cancer: the promise of phage-based nanomedicines.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

110 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

7 authors.

Charlene M DawidczykInstitute for Nanobiotechnology, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, 100 Croft Hall, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.; Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Chloe KimInstitute for Nanobiotechnology, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, 100 Croft Hall, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.; Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Jea Ho ParkInstitute for Nanobiotechnology, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, 100 Croft Hall, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.; Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Luisa M RussellInstitute for Nanobiotechnology, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, 100 Croft Hall, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.; Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.
Kwan Hyi LeeKIST Biomedical Research Institute, 5 Hwarangno 14-gil, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 136-791, Republic of Korea.
Martin G PomperInstitute for Nanobiotechnology, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, 100 Croft Hall, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.; Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA. Electronic address: mpomper@jhmi.edu.
Peter C SearsonInstitute for Nanobiotechnology, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA; Johns Hopkins Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, 100 Croft Hall, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.; Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA. Electronic address: searson@jhu.edu.

Funding

ValidationU54CA151838 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI POMPER, MARTIN G, SEARSON, PETER C · 2010 to 2014
$11.9M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA151838
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to efficiently deliver a drug to a tumor site is dependent on a wide range of physiologically imposed design constraints. Nanotechnology provides the possibility of creating delivery vehicles where these design constraints can be decoupled, allowing new approaches for reducing the unwanted side effects of systemic delivery, increasing targeting efficiency and efficacy. Here we review the design strategies of the two FDA-approved antibody-drug conjugates (Brentuximab vedotin and Trastuzumab emtansine) and the four FDA-approved nanoparticle-based drug delivery platforms (Doxil, DaunoXome, Marqibo, and Abraxane) in the context of the challenges associated with systemic targeted delivery of a drug to a solid tumor. The lessons learned from these nanomedicines provide an important insight into the key challenges associated with the development of new platforms for systemic delivery of anti-cancer drugs.

Indexed as

Drug Delivery SystemsNanomedicineAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsDrug ApprovalDrug DesignHumansImmunoconjugatesNanoparticlesNeoplasmsUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAntineoplastic AgentsImmunoconjugatesActive targetingCirculationEnhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effectLiposomesNanoparticlesTumor targeting

Identifiers

PMID24874289
PMCPMC4132889

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.