Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36544135›Full record

ReviewJournal of nanobiotechnology2022

Biomimetic cell-derived nanocarriers in cancer research.

Enrica Soprano, Ester Polo, Beatriz Pelaz, Pablo Del Pino

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Hypothalamic wars: the last nanodelivery.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Application of nanomedicines in tumor immunotherapy.Journal of molecular cell biology · 2025
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Nanocarriers for cutting-edge cancer immunotherapies.Journal of translational medicine · 2025
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. A small-molecule carrier for the intracellular delivery of a membrane-impermeable protein with retained bioactivity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
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

4 authors.

Enrica SopranoCentro Singular de Investigación en Química Biolóxica e Materiais Moleculares (CiQUS), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 15705, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Ester PoloCentro Singular de Investigación en Química Biolóxica e Materiais Moleculares (CiQUS), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 15705, Santiago de Compostela, Spain. ester.polo@usc.es.
Beatriz PelazCentro Singular de Investigación en Química Biolóxica e Materiais Moleculares (CiQUS), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 15705, Santiago de Compostela, Spain. beatriz.pelaz@usc.es.
Pablo Del PinoCentro Singular de Investigación en Química Biolóxica e Materiais Moleculares (CiQUS), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 15705, Santiago de Compostela, Spain. pablo.delpino@usc.es.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanoparticles have now long demonstrated capabilities that make them attractive to use in biology and medicine. Some of them, such as lipid nanoparticles (SARS-CoV-2 vaccines) or metallic nanoparticles (contrast agents) are already approved for their use in the clinic. However, considering the constantly growing body of different formulations and the huge research around nanomaterials the number of candidates reaching clinical trials or being commercialized is minimal. The reasons behind being related to the "synthetic" and "foreign" character of their surface. Typically, nanomaterials aiming to develop a function or deliver a cargo locally, fail by showing strong off-target accumulation and generation of adverse responses, which is connected to their strong recognition by immune phagocytes primarily. Therefore, rendering in negligible numbers of nanoparticles developing their intended function. While a wide range of coatings has been applied to avoid certain interactions with the surrounding milieu, the issues remained. Taking advantage of the natural cell membranes, in an approach that resembles a cell transfer, the use of cell-derived surfaces has risen as an alternative to artificial coatings or encapsulation methods. Biomimetic technologies are based on the use of isolated natural components to provide autologous properties to the nanoparticle or cargo being encapsulated, thus, improving their therapeutic behavior. The main goal is to replicate the (bio)-physical properties and functionalities of the source cell and tissue, not only providing a stealthy character to the core but also taking advantage of homotypic properties, that could prove relevant for targeted strategies. Such biomimetic formulations have the potential to overcome the main issues of approaches to provide specific features and identities synthetically. In this review, we provide insight into the challenges of nano-biointerfaces for drug delivery; and the main applications of biomimetic materials derived from specific cell types, focusing on the unique strengths of the fabrication of novel nanotherapeutics in cancer therapy.

Indexed as

Biomimetic MaterialsCOVID-19NanoparticlesNeoplasmsBiomimeticsCell MembraneCOVID-19 VaccinesDrug Delivery SystemsHumansSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 VaccinesBiomimetic nanocarrierCancer therapyCell-membrane coating NanoparticlesDrug deliveryIntracellular delivery

Identifiers

PMID36544135
PMCPMC9771790

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.