ReviewMicromachines2017
Recent Progress toward Microfluidic Quality Control Testing of Radiopharmaceuticals.
Review in Micromachines, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Droplet-Based Microfluidic Platform for Rapid Optical Detection of Bacteria: Proof-of-Concept for Radiopharmaceutical Sterility Testing.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Beyond Lipids: Exploring Advances in Polymeric Gene Delivery in the Lipid Nanoparticles Era.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2024Review
- Advances in Microfluidic Systems and Numerical Modeling in Biomedical Applications: A Review.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Radiopharmaceuticals: navigating the frontier of precision medicine and therapeutic innovation.European journal of medical research · 2024Review
- Development and Optimization ofACS pharmacology & translational science · 2023Review
- Development of a Lensless Radiomicroscope for Cellular-Resolution Radionuclide Imaging.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2023Article
- Radiolabeled nanomaterial for cancer diagnostics and therapeutics: principles and concepts.Cancer nanotechnology · 2023Review
- Economical droplet-based microfluidic production of [Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Faster, better, and cheaper: harnessing microfluidics and mass spectrometry for biotechnology.RSC chemical biology · 2021Review
- The Current Role of Microfluidics in Radiofluorination Chemistry.Molecular imaging and biology · 2020Review
- Integration of High-Resolution Radiation Detector for Hybrid Microchip Electrophoresis.Analytical chemistry · 2020Article
- Development and implementation of ISAR, a new synthesis platform for radiopharmaceutical production.EJNMMI radiopharmacy and chemistry · 2019Article
- Quality Assessment of Tc-99m Methylene Diphosphonate (MDP) Radiopharmaceutical Prepared Using Different Cold Kit Fractionation Methods.Indian journal of nuclear medicine : IJNM : the official journal of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, IndiaArticle
- High-throughput radio-TLC analysis.Nuclear medicine and biologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Radiopharmaceuticals labeled with short-lived positron-emitting or gamma-emitting isotopes are injected into patients just prior to performing positron emission tomography (PET) or single photon emission tomography (SPECT) scans, respectively. These imaging modalities are widely used in clinical care, as well as in the development and evaluation of new therapies in clinical research. Prior to injection, these radiopharmaceuticals (tracers) must undergo quality control (QC) testing to ensure product purity, identity, and safety for human use. Quality tests can be broadly categorized as (i) pharmaceutical tests, needed to ensure molecular identity, physiological compatibility and that no microbiological, pyrogenic, chemical, or particulate contamination is present in the final preparation; and (ii) radioactive tests, needed to ensure proper dosing and that there are no radiochemical and radionuclidic impurities that could interfere with the biodistribution or imaging. Performing the required QC tests is cumbersome and time-consuming, and requires an array of expensive analytical chemistry equipment and significant dedicated lab space. Calibrations, day of use tests, and documentation create an additional burden. Furthermore, in contrast to ordinary pharmaceuticals, each batch of short-lived radiopharmaceuticals must be manufactured and tested within a short period of time to avoid significant losses due to radioactive decay. To meet these challenges, several efforts are underway to develop integrated QC testing instruments that automatically perform and document all of the required tests. More recently, microfluidic quality control systems have been gaining increasing attention due to vastly reduced sample and reagent consumption, shorter analysis times, higher detection sensitivity, increased multiplexing, and reduced instrumentation size. In this review, we describe each of the required QC tests and conventional testing methods, followed by a discussion of efforts to directly miniaturize the test or examples in the literature that could be implemented for miniaturized QC testing.
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.