ReviewMolecular imaging and biology2018
Imaging of Nanoparticle Distribution to Assess Treatments That Alter Delivery.
Review in Molecular imaging and biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing Therapeutic Nanoparticle Accumulation in Tumors Using Nanobubble-Based Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging.ACS nano · 2024Article
- ES-MION-Based Dual-Modality PET/MRI Probes for Acidic Tumor Microenvironment Imaging.ACS omega · 2022Article
- Intravenously Infused Stem Cells for Cancer Treatment.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2021Review
- Spatial heterogeneity of nanomedicine investigated by multiscale imaging of the drug, the nanoparticle and the tumour environment.Theranostics · 2020Review
- Using imaging modalities to predict nanoparticle distribution and treatment efficacy in solid tumors: The growing role of ultrasound.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnologyReview
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
Molecular imaging is a vital tool to non-invasively measure nanoparticle delivery to solid tumors. Despite the myriad of nanoparticles studied for cancer, successful applications of nanoparticles in humans is limited by inconsistent and ineffective delivery. Successful nanoparticle delivery in preclinical models is often attributed to enhanced permeability and retention (EPR)-a set of conditions that is heterogeneous and transient in patients. Thus, researchers are evaluating therapeutic strategies to modify nanoparticle delivery, particularly treatments which have demonstrated effects on EPR conditions. Imaging nanoparticle distribution provides a means to measure the effects of therapeutic intervention on nanoparticle delivery to solid tumors. This review focuses on the utility of imaging to measure treatment-induced changes in nanoparticle delivery to tumors and provides preclinical examples studying a broad range of therapeutic interventions.
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.