ReviewPharmaceutics2022
Skin-on-a-Chip Technology: Microengineering Physiologically Relevant In Vitro Skin Models.
Review in Pharmaceutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing intradermal vaccine delivery: Focus on hollow microneedles and skin models.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Review
- Recent advances in immunocompetent human skin-on-chip models: Construction strategies and biomedical applications.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
- Current and emerging new approach & methodologies for skin hazard assessment.Toxicological research · 2026Review
- Engineering skin microphysiological systems for transdermal drug screening based on strategic model selection and quantitative prediction roadmaps.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- Engineering biomimetic tissue barrier models on chips: From design and fabrication to applications in disease modeling and drug screening.Biomaterials · 2026Review
- In vitro modelling of extracellular matrix changes during skin aging: from static 2D to 3D dynamic microphysiological systems.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2026Review
- A Novel Microfluidic System for 3D Epidermis and Full-Thickness Skin Growth for Nanoparticle Safety Assessment.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Personalized Models of Biological Barriers and Their Diseases: Recent Progress with Organs-On-Chips.Advanced biology · 2026Review
- AlternativeExpert reviews in molecular medicine · 2026Review
- Stimuli-Responsive Nanocarriers for Transdermal siRNA Delivery: Mechanisms, Challenges, and Therapeutic Strategies.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Advancing transdermal drug delivery through 4D bioprinting and dynamic skin modelling.Frontiers in drug delivery · 2026Review
- Cracking the Skin Barrier: Models and Methods Driving Dermal Drug Delivery.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Skin-on-chip: Quo vadis?APL bioengineering · 2025Review
- Vessel-on-a-Chip to Study Vascular Endothelial Inflammation.Current protocols · 2025Article
- Aging on Chip: Harnessing the Potential of Microfluidic Technologies in Aging and Rejuvenation Research.Advanced healthcare materials · 2025Review
- Organs on chips: fundamentals, bioengineering and applications.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2025Review
- The 3C (Cell Culture, Computer Simulation, Clinical Trial) Solution for Optimizing the 3R (Replace, Reduction, Refine) Framework during Preclinical Research Involving Laboratory Animals.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2025Review
- Development of pathological skin models: from conventional techniques to 3D bioprinting.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Revolutionizing Drug Discovery: The Impact of Distinct Designs and Biosensor Integration in Microfluidics-Based Organ-on-a-Chip Technology.Biosensors · 2024Review
- 3D Models Currently Proposed to Investigate Human Skin Aging and Explore Preventive and Reparative Approaches: A Descriptive Review.Biomolecules · 2024Review
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
The increased demand for physiologically relevant in vitro human skin models for testing pharmaceutical drugs has led to significant advancements in skin engineering. One of the most promising approaches is the use of in vitro microfluidic systems to generate advanced skin models, commonly known as skin-on-a-chip (SoC) devices. These devices allow the simulation of key mechanical, functional and structural features of the human skin, better mimicking the native microenvironment. Importantly, contrary to conventional cell culture techniques, SoC devices can perfuse the skin tissue, either by the inclusion of perfusable lumens or by the use of microfluidic channels acting as engineered vasculature. Moreover, integrating sensors on the SoC device allows real-time, non-destructive monitoring of skin function and the effect of topically and systemically applied drugs. In this Review, the major challenges and key prerequisites for the creation of physiologically relevant SoC devices for drug testing are considered. Technical (e.g., SoC fabrication and sensor integration) and biological (e.g., cell sourcing and scaffold materials) aspects are discussed. Recent advancements in SoC devices are here presented, and their main achievements and drawbacks are compared and discussed. Finally, this review highlights the current challenges that need to be overcome for the clinical translation of SoC devices.
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.