Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40490771›Full record

ReviewMolecular cancer2025

Nanomedicine in Cancer Therapeutics: Current Perspectives from Bench to Bedside.

K M Abdullah, Gunjan Sharma, Ajay P Singh, Jawed A Siddiqui

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Trojan Horse Strategy: How Biomimetic Nanomedicine Remodels the Tumor Microenvironment.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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.

K M AbdullahDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, 39216, USA.
Gunjan SharmaDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, 39216, USA.
Ajay P SinghDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, 39216, USA.
Jawed A SiddiquiDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, 39216, USA. jsiddiqui@umc.edu.

Funding

DOD Prostate Cancer Research Program W81XWH-21-1-0640
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer is among the leading causes of death worldwide, with projections indicating that it will claim 35 million lives by the year 2050. Conventional therapies, such as chemotherapy and immune modulation, have reduced cancer mortality to some extent; however, they have limited efficacy due to their broad mode of action, often resulting in cytotoxic effects on normal cells along with the malignant tissues, ultimately limiting their overall optimal therapeutic efficacy outcomes.Rapid advances in nanotechnology and an evolving understanding of cancer mechanisms have propelled the development of a diverse array of nanocarriers to vanquish the hurdles in achieving sophisticated drug delivery with reduced off-target toxicity. Nanoformulations can deliver the anti-cancer agents precisely to the tumor cell by integrating a multitarget approach that allows for tissue-, cell-, or organelle-specific delivery and internalization. Despite the immense interest and unmatched advancements in modern oncology equipped with nanomedicines, only a few nanoformulations have successfully translated into clinical settings. A major reason behind this shortcoming is the lack of a rationale design incorporating smart, responsive targeting features, leading to a compromised therapeutic window due to inefficient internalization or erroneous intracellular localization with unsuccessful payload release. This review aims to summarize the recent perspective of nanomedicine and its translation to clinical practice, with a particular focus on the evolution of strategies used in tumor targeting from traditional EPR-based passive mechanisms to advanced active and multi-stage approaches. We highlight the coupling of organelle-specific and stimuli-responsive nanocarriers, discuss the potential of biomimetic and cell-mediated delivery systems, and also shed light on technologies such as microfluidics, tumor-on-chip models, and AI-assisted synthesis. Finally, this review explores translational hurdles ranging from biological and manufacturing challenges to regulatory bottlenecks and outlines how innovative modeling systems and engineering solutions can bridge the gap from bench to bedside in cancer nanotherapeutics.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsNanomedicineNeoplasmsAnimalsDrug Delivery SystemsHumansNanoparticlesTranslational Research, BiomedicalAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID40490771
PMCPMC12147392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.