ReviewPharmaceutics2024
Evaluation of Advanced Nanomaterials for Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.
Review in Pharmaceutics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomimetic Membrane Interface Technologies for Detection and Isolation of CTCs and EVs: Advances and Opportunities in Liquid Biopsy.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Lignin-Based Nanocarrier for Simultaneous Delivery ofPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Analytical Techniques for Characterizing Tumor-Targeted Antibody-Functionalized Nanoparticles.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer is a persistent global disease and a threat to the human species, with numerous cases reported every year. Over recent decades, a steady but slowly increasing mortality rate has been observed. While many attempts have been made using conventional methods alone as a theragnostic strategy, they have yielded very little success. Most of the shortcomings of such conventional methods can be attributed to the high demands of industrial growth and ever-increasing environmental pollution. This requires some high-tech biomedical interventions and other solutions. Thus, researchers have been compelled to explore alternative methods. This has brought much attention to nanotechnology applications, specifically magnetic nanomaterials, as the sole or conjugated theragnostic methods. The exponential growth of nanomaterials with overlapping applications in various fields is due to their potential properties, which depend on the type of synthesis route used. Either top-down or bottom-up strategies synthesize various types of NPs. The top-down only branches out to one method, i.e., physical, and the bottom-up has two methods, chemical and biological syntheses. This review highlights some synthesis techniques, the types of nanoparticle properties each technique produces, and their potential use in the biomedical field, more specifically for cancer. Despite the evident drawbacks, the success achieved in furthering nanoparticle applications to more complex cancer stages and locations is unmatched.
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.