ReviewVisceral medicine2020
Nanoparticles in Gastrooncology.
Review in Visceral medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A bibliometric analysis of the evolution of nanotechnology research in precision theranostics for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Discover nano · 2026Article
- Emerging mechanisms of kinase inhibitor escape and clinical implications of ponatinib in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Biomembrane-coated nanosystems as next-generation delivery systems for the treatment of gastrointestinal cancers.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2025Review
- Histoculture drug response assay predicts chemotherapy efficacy and improves survival in gastrointestinal cancers.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Exploring nanotechnology solutions for improved outcomes in gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Robotics in Surgery and Endoscopy.Visceral medicine · 2020Article
- Promising Clinical Applications of Hydrogels Associated With Precise Cancer Treatment: A Review.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastrointestinal malignancies have the greatest incidence and cancer-associated death rates worldwide. Routine therapeutic modalities include surgery, chemotherapy and radiation but they often fail to reach the goal of cancer-free survival. SUMMARY: In the light of this urgent medical need for the treatment of GI tumors, nanotech-nology-based approaches, i.e. nanomedicine, promise new therapeutic options. Using nanoparticles instead of classically designed drugs, targeting anticancer agents directly to the tumor site may revolutionize both diagnostic and therapeutic tools thereby facilitating the identification and elimination of malignant cells. Importantly, diagnostic insight and therapeutic effects can be achieved simultaneously through the same nanoparticle. Additionally, a nanoparticle may be loaded with more than one agent, thereby further increasing the value and power of the nanotechnology approach in oncologic therapeutic concepts. Although most insight into mechanisms of nanomedicine has been gained from in vitro and preclinical in vivo models, few clinical trials have been conducted, and nanomedicine-based concepts are already part of standard treatment algorithms. However, despite substantial progress it remains a challenge to design nanoparticles that feature all desirable characteristics at the same time. KEY MESSAGES: This review seeks to provide substantial insight into the current status of nanomedicine-based approaches employed for diagnostic and/or therapeutic purposes in the field of gastrointestinal cancers by highlighting achievements and pointing out unresolved issues that need to be further addressed by future research attempts.
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.