Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29923692›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology2019

Mapping of the available standards against the regulatory needs for nanomedicines.

Blanka Halamoda-Kenzaoui, Uwe Holzwarth, Gert Roebben, Alessia Bogni, Susanne Bremer-Hoffmann

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing 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

60 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Nanobiotechnologies for stroke treatment.Nanomedicine (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Nanotoxicology: developments and new insights.Nanomedicine (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Blanka Halamoda-KenzaouiJoint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy.
Uwe HolzwarthJoint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy.
Gert RoebbenJoint Research Centre, European Commission, Geel, Belgium.
Alessia BogniJoint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy.
Susanne Bremer-HoffmannJoint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Appropriate documentary standards and reference materials are crucial building blocks for the development of innovative products. In order to support the emerging sector of nanomedicine, relevant standards must be identified and/or developed before the products will enter into the regulatory approval process. The anticipation of standardization needs requires a good understanding on the regulatory information requirements that can be triggered by the particularities of nanomedicines. However, robust datasets allowing firm conclusions on regulatory demands are not yet available due to a lack of regulatory experience with innovative products. Such a catch-22 situation can only be advanced in an iterative process by monitoring continuously the scientific evidence and by promoting intensive knowledge exchange between all involved stakeholders. In this study, we have compiled information requirements released by regulatory scientists so far and mapped it against available standards that could be of relevance for nanomedicines. Our gap analysis clearly demonstrated that for some endpoints such as drug release/loading and the interaction of nanomedicines with the immune system no standards are available so far. The emerging nanomedicine sector could benefit from cross-sector collaboration and review the suitability of standards that have been developed for nanomaterials used for other industrial applications. Only a concerted action of all parties can lead to a smooth translation of nanomedicines to clinical application and to the market. This is in particular important because nanotechnology-based drug delivery systems are key for the development and implementation of personalized medicine. This article is characterized under: Toxicology and Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine > Regulatory and Policy Issues in Nanomedicine.

Indexed as

Social Control, FormalAnimalsDrug ApprovalDrug LiberationHumansNanomedicineReference Standardsinformation requirementsnanomedicinespersonalized medicinepreclinical characterizationregulatory uncertaintiesstandards

Identifiers

PMID29923692
PMCPMC6585614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.