ArticleScientific reports2025
Intelligence analysis of drug nanoparticles delivery efficiency to cancer tumor sites using machine learning models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanisms and determinants of mRNALipid Nanoparticle biodistribution: From pharmacokinetics to clinical translation.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2026Review
- Review
- Are similar nanoforms comparable in biodistribution? Data-driven approaches for optimizing nanomedicine design.Materials today. Nano · 2026Article
- Physics informed machine learning for predictive toxicology and optimization of curcumin nanocarriers.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Deep Tumor Penetration Using Nanoparticle Delivery Systems: Programmed Design Strategies and Emerging Evaluation Platforms.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in the Design and Development of Nanoparticle Drug Delivery Systems: A Systematic Review.Advances in pharmacological and pharmaceutical sciences · 2026Review
- Emerging Technologies and Integrated Interdisciplinary Strategies for Mitigating Protein Aggregation in Therapeutic Formulations.Pharmaceutical research · 2026Review
- Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery Systems: Current Advances and Future Directions.Current drug targets · 2026Review
- Computational evaluation using machine learning for analysis of membrane desalination process powered by solar energy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Quantitative analysis of ferrohydrodynamics of blood containing magnetic nanocarriers for advanced drug delivery design via hybrid machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advanced hybrid intelligence evaluation of nanomedicine delivery to various organs using machine learning and adaptive tree structured Parzen estimator.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Estimation and validation of solubility of recombinant protein in E. coli strains via various advanced machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Unlocking ginsenosides' therapeutic power with polymer-based delivery systems: current applications and future perspectives.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study focuses on the use of machine learning (ML) models to predict the biodistribution of nanoparticles in various organs, using a dataset derived from research on nanoparticle behavior for cancer treatment. The dataset includes both categorical and numerical variables related to nanoparticle properties, with a focus on their distribution across organs such as the tumor, heart, liver, spleen, lung, and kidney tissues. In order to address the complex and non-linear nature of the data, three machine learning models were utilized: Bayesian Ridge Regression (BRR), Kernel Ridge Regression (KRR), and K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN). The selection of these models was based on their wide range of capabilities in dealing with non-linear relationships and data complexity. To further model performance and strength, the study also applied cutting-edge methods including the Firefly Algorithm for hyperparameter tuning and Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) for feature selection. Based on higher R² and lower RMSE values for most output parameters, the study concluded that Kernel Ridge Regression (KRR) did better compared to other models in predicting biodistribution outcomes. The study revealed that machine learning models, particularly KRR, exhibit a high level of efficiency in accurately representing the non-linear characteristics of nanoparticle biodistribution. The results obtained provide valuable insights into the optimization of predictive models for the behavior of nanoparticles. These models can be further enhanced by the use of advanced feature selection and hyperparameter tuning techniques.
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.