Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33395269›Full record

ArticleACS biomaterials science & engineering2020

Production of 3D Tumor Models of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas for Nanotheranostics Assessment.

Melissa Santi, Ana Katrina Mapanao, Valentina Cappello, Valerio Voliani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS biomaterials science & engineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Enhancing Transcutaneous Drug Delivery: Advanced Perspectives on Skin Models.JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Frontiers in oncology · 2022
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. A Standard Protocol for the Production and Bioevaluation of EthicalACS pharmacology & translational science · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
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

4 authors.

Melissa SantiCenter for Nanotechnology Innovation@NEST, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Piazza San Silvestro, 12-56126 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9374-883X
Ana Katrina MapanaoCenter for Nanotechnology Innovation@NEST, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Piazza San Silvestro, 12-56126 Pisa, Italy.
Valentina CappelloCenter for Nanotechnology Innovation@NEST, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Piazza San Silvestro, 12-56126 Pisa, Italy.
Valerio VolianiCenter for Nanotechnology Innovation@NEST, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Piazza San Silvestro, 12-56126 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1311-3349

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As a first approach, standard 2D cell culture techniques are usually employed for the screening of drugs and nanomaterials. Despite the easy handling, findings achieved on 2D cultures are often not efficiently translatable to

Indexed as

Head and Neck NeoplasmsAnimalsCell Culture TechniquesHumansSquamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and NeckTheranostic Nanomedicine3D modelshanging drop methodhead and neck carcinomasoncologyspheroids

Identifiers

PMID33395269
PMCPMC7735655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.