Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35079631›Full record

ReviewBioengineering & translational medicine2022

Radiation nanosensitizers in cancer therapy-From preclinical discoveries to the outcomes of early clinical trials.

Colette Bilynsky, Nadine Millot, Anne-Laure Papa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioengineering & translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Microenvironmental remodeling in FLASH radiotherapy.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. An Experimental Model of Proton-Beam-Induced Radiation Dermatitis In Vivo.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

3 authors.

Colette BilynskyDepartment of Biomedical Engineering The George Washington University Washington District of Columbia USA.
Nadine MillotLaboratoire Interdisciplinaire Carnot de Bourgogne UMR 6303, CNRS, Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté Dijon Cedex France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0127-3858
Anne-Laure PapaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering The George Washington University Washington District of Columbia USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8282-5564

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Improving the efficacy and spatial targeting of radiation therapy while sparing surrounding normal tissues has been a guiding principle for its use in cancer therapy. Nanotechnologies have shown considerable growth in terms of innovation and the development of new therapeutic approaches, particularly as radiosensitizers. The aim of this study was to systematically review how nanoparticles (NPs) are used to enhance the radiotherapeutic effect, including preclinical and clinical studies. Clinicaltrials.gov was used to perform the search using the following terms: radiation, cancer, and NPs. In this review, we describe the various designs of nano-radioenhancers, the rationale for using such technology, as well as their chemical and biological effects. Human trials are then discussed with an emphasis on their design and detailed clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

cancernanosized radiosensitizersradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID35079631
PMCPMC8780058

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.