ReviewCancer pathogenesis and therapy2025
An overview of randomized phase III clinical trials of cancer nanomedicines.
Review in Cancer pathogenesis and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antibody-Empowered Nanomedicine for Precise Biomedical Applications.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Applying biotechnology to overcome cancer drug resistance and improve public health outcomes.Osong public health and research perspectives · 2026Article
- TRAIL of Hope: Bioactive Dietary Component-Driven Carrier-Free Nanoplatforms for Synergistically Enhanced Tumor Multimodal Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- The Nanocarrier Landscape─Evaluating Key Drug Delivery Vehicles and Their Capabilities: A Translational Perspective.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2025Review
- Advances in nanoparticle-mediated cancer therapeutics: Current research and future perspectives.Cancer pathogenesis and therapy · 2025Review
- Current Progress of Cell Therapy Clinical Trials in China in 2014-2024.BioMed research international · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cancer therapy has undergone significant advances in recent decades attributed to personalized medicine and targeted drug delivery. Among the promising approaches, the use of nano-based delivery systems has become a relevant approach capable of improving treatment by releasing antineoplastic drugs at the target site, improving therapeutic efficacy, minimizing cytotoxicity in healthy tissues, and ultimately, reducing the intensity of adverse effects of chemotherapy. This study prospectively evaluated the impact of formulating anti-neoplastic drugs as nanomedicines on clinical response, overall survival, safety, and quality of life of cancer patients, based on the outcomes of randomized clinical trials. Methods: A literature review was carried out by systematically searching the PubMed/MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) databases for phase III clinical trials, comparing nanomedicines with conventional therapies for the treatment of various cancer types. Results: The nanomedicines analyzed were those that are approved and used in Brazil, considering the country's emerging market for advanced cancer treatments. From a total of 303 articles found, 26 articles were selected for systematic review. Studies showed that PEGylated l-asparaginase achieved a similar therapeutic effect to that of l-asparaginase, with fewer applications due to its longer half-life. Paclitaxel bound to albumin improved therapeutic efficacy as well as reduced infusion time and solvent-related toxicity of the conventional paclitaxel formulation. PEGylated liposomal doxorubicin showed better pharmacokinetics, reduced cardiotoxicity, and improved quality of life in cancer patients compared to that of free doxorubicin. Conclusions: This study reinforces the scientific evidence of the added value of nanomedicines to improve therapeutic efficacy and reduce toxicity in patients under chemotherapy.
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.