ReviewCurrent drug targets2015
Biomedical Imaging in Implantable Drug Delivery Systems.
Review in Current drug targets, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Mixing Approach and Bubble Formation on In Situ Forming Implant Properties.Pharmaceutical research · 2026Article
- Optical coherence tomography for noninvasive monitoring of drug delivery.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2025Review
- Article
- Bone scaffolds-based localized drugs delivery for osteosarcoma: current status and future perspective.Drug delivery · 2024Review
- Toward Fully Automated Personalized Orthopedic Treatments: Innovations and Interdisciplinary Gaps.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- 3D-printed implantable devices with biodegradable rate-controlling membrane for sustained delivery of hydrophobic drugs.Drug delivery · 2022Article
- Targeted Delivery of Chemotherapeutic Agents for Osteosarcoma Treatment.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Novel application of synchrotron x-ray computed tomography for ex-vivo imaging of subcutaneously injected polymeric microsphere suspension formulations.Pharmaceutical research · 2020Article
- Development of a Biodegradable Subcutaneous Implant for Prolonged Drug Delivery Using 3D Printing.Pharmaceutics · 2020Article
- Noninvasive characterization of in situ forming implant diffusivity using diffusion-weighted MRI.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2019Article
- Ultrahigh field MR imaging of a subconjunctival anti-glaucoma drug delivery system in a rabbit model.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Article
- Simultaneous monitoring of the drug release and antitumor effect of a novel drug delivery system-MWCNTs/DOX/TC.Drug delivery · 2017Article
- Validation of Ultrasound Elastography Imaging for Nondestructive Characterization of Stiffer Biomaterials.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2016Article
- Development of a High-Throughput Ultrasound Technique for the Analysis of Tissue Engineering Constructs.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Implantable drug delivery systems (DDS) provide a platform for sustained release of therapeutic agents over a period of weeks to months and sometimes years. Such strategies are typically used clinically to increase patient compliance by replacing frequent administration of drugs such as contraceptives and hormones to maintain plasma concentration within the therapeutic window. Implantable or injectable systems have also been investigated as a means of local drug administration which favors high drug concentration at a site of interest, such as a tumor, while reducing systemic drug exposure to minimize unwanted side effects. Significant advances in the field of local DDS have led to increasingly sophisticated technology with new challenges including quantification of local and systemic pharmacokinetics and implant- body interactions. Because many of these sought-after parameters are highly dependent on the tissue properties at the implantation site, and rarely represented adequately with in vitro models, new nondestructive techniques that can be used to study implants in situ are highly desirable. Versatile imaging tools can meet this need and provide quantitative data on morphological and functional aspects of implantable systems. The focus of this review article is an overview of current biomedical imaging techniques, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound imaging, optical imaging, X-ray and computed tomography (CT), and their application in evaluation of implantable DDS.
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.