ArticleBiomaterials advances2022
How safe are magnetic nanomotors: From cells to animals.
Article in Biomaterials advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Synergistic magneto-enzymatic propulsion enables multimodal nanomotor swarms.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Technology Roadmap of Micro/Nanorobots.ACS nano · 2025Review
- Micromotors Meet Collective (Bio)sensing: The Asset Behind the Assay.Analytical chemistry · 2025Review
- Microfluidic mixing by magnetic particles: Progress and prospects.Biomicrofluidics · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Helical magnetic nanomotors can be actuated using an external magnetic field and have potential applications in drug delivery, colloidal manipulation, and bio-microrheology. Recently, they have been maneuvered in biological environments such as vitreous humour, dentinal tubules, peritoneal fluid, stromal matrix, and blood, which are promising developments for clinical applications. However, their biocompatibility and biodistribution are vital parameters that must be assessed before further use. An extensive quantitative evaluation has been performed for these parameters for the first time through in vitro and in vivo experiments. Investigations of cell death, proliferation, and DNA damage ascertain that the motors are non-toxic. Also, an unbiased transcriptomic analysis affirms that the motors are not genotoxic till 20 motors/ cell. Toxicity studies in mice reveal that the motors show no signs of toxicity up to a dose of 55 mg/ kg body weight. Further, the biodistribution studies show that they remain in the blood circulation after injection and at later stages possibly adhere to the walls of the blood vessel because of adsorption. However, perfusion with physiological saline decreases this adsorption/adhesion. Overall, we demonstrate the biocompatibility of nanomotors in live cellular and organismal systems, and a systemic biodistribution analysis reveals organ-specific retention of motors.
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.