Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34204198›Full record

ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticles and Mesoporous Bioactive Glasses for Wound Management: From Skin Regeneration to Cancer Therapy.

Sara Hooshmand, Sahar Mollazadeh, Negar Akrami, Mehrnoosh Ghanad, Ahmed El-Fiqi, Francesco Baino, Simin Nazarnezhad, Saeid Kargozar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Silica nanoparticles in medicine: overcoming pathologies through advanced drug delivery, diagnostics, and therapeutic strategies.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologie
    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

8 authors.

Sara HooshmandPharmacological Research Center of Medicinal Plants, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad 917794-8564, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-2417-8797
Sahar MollazadehDepartment of Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (FUM), Azadi Sq., Mashhad 917794-8564, Iran.
Negar AkramiDepartment of Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (FUM), Azadi Sq., Mashhad 917794-8564, Iran.
Mehrnoosh GhanadDepartment of Materials Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (FUM), Azadi Sq., Mashhad 917794-8564, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-4299-8660
Ahmed El-FiqiGlass Research Department, National Research Centre, Cairo 12622, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0002-2344-1728
Francesco BainoInstitute of Materials Physics and Engineering, Applied Science and Technology Department, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8860-0497
Simin NazarnezhadTissue Engineering Research Group (TERG), Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad 917794-8564, Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-9174-0685
Saeid KargozarTissue Engineering Research Group (TERG), Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad 917794-8564, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exploring new therapies for managing skin wounds is under progress and, in this regard, mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) and mesoporous bioactive glasses (MBGs) offer great opportunities in treating acute, chronic, and malignant wounds. In general, therapeutic effectiveness of both MSNs and MBGs in different formulations (fine powder, fibers, composites etc.) has been proved over all the four stages of normal wound healing including hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. The main merits of these porous substances can be summarized as their excellent biocompatibility and the ability of loading and delivering a wide range of both hydrophobic and hydrophilic bioactive molecules and chemicals. In addition, doping with inorganic elements (e.g., Cu, Ga, and Ta) into MSNs and MBGs structure is a feasible and practical approach to prepare customized materials for improved skin regeneration. Nowadays, MSNs and MBGs could be utilized in the concept of targeted therapy of skin malignancies (e.g., melanoma) by grafting of specific ligands. Since potential effects of various parameters including the chemical composition, particle size/morphology, textural properties, and surface chemistry should be comprehensively determined via cellular in vitro and in vivo assays, it seems still too early to draw a conclusion on ultimate efficacy of MSNs and MBGs in skin regeneration. In this regard, there are some concerns over the final fate of MSNs and MBGs in the wound site plus optimal dosages for achieving the best outcomes that deserve careful investigation in the future.

Indexed as

angiogenesiscancer therapydrug releasemesoporous bioactive glassmesoporous silica nanoparticlesskin regenerationtissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID34204198
PMCPMC8235211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.