Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35516960›Full record

ReviewRSC advances2020

Nanocarriers for ocular drug delivery: current status and translational opportunity.

Srividya Gorantla, Vamshi Krishna Rapalli, Tejashree Waghule, Prem Prakash Singh, Sunil Kumar Dubey, Ranendra N Saha, Gautam Singhvi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in RSC advances, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 122 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
122citing papers in PubMed
12.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

122 citing papers in PubMed, 285 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Design and PreliminaryCurrent pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Recent advances and future challenges in nanosystems for ocular drug delivery.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2025
    Review

62 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Srividya GorantlaIndustrial Research Laboratory, Department of Pharmacy, Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani, Pilani Campus Rajasthan India 333031 gautam.singhvi@pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in.
Vamshi Krishna RapalliIndustrial Research Laboratory, Department of Pharmacy, Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani, Pilani Campus Rajasthan India 333031 gautam.singhvi@pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in.
Tejashree WaghuleIndustrial Research Laboratory, Department of Pharmacy, Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani, Pilani Campus Rajasthan India 333031 gautam.singhvi@pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6891-8999
Prem Prakash SinghFormulation Development, Slayback Pharma India LLP Hyderabad Telangana 500072 India.
Sunil Kumar DubeyIndustrial Research Laboratory, Department of Pharmacy, Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani, Pilani Campus Rajasthan India 333031 gautam.singhvi@pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7554-3232
Ranendra N SahaIndustrial Research Laboratory, Department of Pharmacy, Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani, Pilani Campus Rajasthan India 333031 gautam.singhvi@pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in.
Gautam SinghviIndustrial Research Laboratory, Department of Pharmacy, Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani, Pilani Campus Rajasthan India 333031 gautam.singhvi@pilani.bits-pilani.ac.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9706-9244
Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani · INBirla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani - Dubai Campus · AEUniversity of Hyderabad · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ocular diseases have a significant effect on vision and quality of life. Drug delivery to ocular tissues is a challenge to formulation scientists. The major barriers to delivering drugs to the anterior and posterior segments include physiological barriers (nasolacrimal drainage, blinking), anatomical barriers (static and dynamic), efflux pumps and metabolic barriers. The static barriers comprise the different layers of the cornea, sclera, and blood-aqueous barriers whereas dynamic barriers involve conjunctival blood flow, lymphatic clearance and tear drainage. The tight junctions of the blood-retinal barrier (BRB) restrict systemically administered drugs from entering the retina. Nanocarriers have been found to be effective at overcoming the issues associated with conventional ophthalmic dosage forms. Various nanocarriers, including nanodispersion systems, nanomicelles, lipidic nanocarriers, polymeric nanoparticles, liposomes, niosomes, and dendrimers, have been investigated for improved permeation and effective targeted drug delivery to various ophthalmic sites. In this review, various nanomedicines and their application for ophthalmic delivery of therapeutics are discussed. Additionally, scale-up and clinical status are also addressed to understand the current scenario for ophthalmic drug delivery.

Identifiers

PMID35516960
PMCPMC9055630
OpenAlexW3044166486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.