Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40813104›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology

Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence in Nanomedicine.

Wei-Chun Chou, Alexa Canchola, Fan Zhang, Zhoumeng Lin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Wei-Chun ChouDepartment of Environmental Sciences, University of California, Riverside, California, USA.
Alexa CancholaDepartment of Environmental Sciences, University of California, Riverside, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8285-4795
Fan ZhangDepartment of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Zhoumeng LinDepartment of Environmental and Global Health, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8731-8366

Funding

Development of a web-based predictive model of nanoparticle delivery to tumors by integrating physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling with artificial intelligenceR01EB031022 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI Zhoumeng Lin · 2021 to 2026
$2.2M
Computational Modeling on the Interaction of Nanomedicine with Protein Corona and Its Impact on Tumor Delivery EfficiencyR03EB035643 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE · PI CHOU, WEI-CHUN · 2024 to 2025
$171k
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB031022NIBIB NIH HHS R01EB031022NIBIB NIH HHS R03 EB035643NIBIB NIH HHS R03EB035643
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanomedicine harnesses nanoscale materials, such as lipid, polymeric, and inorganic nanoparticles, to deliver diagnostic or therapeutic agents for cancer, infectious disease, and neurological disorders, among others. However, translating promising nanoparticle designs into clinically approved products remains a challenge. Factors such as particle size, surface chemistry, and payload interactions must be optimized, and preclinical results often fail to predict human efficacy. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have emerged as transformative tools to address these hurdles at every stage of nanomedicine development. By rapidly screening extensive libraries and extracting structure-function relationships, AI-driven models can rationalize nanoparticle formulation, predict biodistribution, and guide optimal design. Techniques like high-throughput DNA barcoding and automated liquid handling facilitate robust, large-scale data collection, feeding into computational pipelines that expedite discovery while reducing reliance on resource-intensive trial-and-error experiments. AI-based platforms also enable improved modeling of protein corona formation, which profoundly affects nanoparticle immunogenicity and cellular uptake. Despite these advances, challenges persist in data standardization, model generalizability, and establishing a clear regulatory framework since no dedicated U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance addresses the intersection of AI and nanomedicine. Overcoming these limitations requires harmonized data sharing, rigorous in vivo validation, and clear ethical and regulatory guidelines. This review summarizes the rapidly evolving landscape of AI in nanomedicine, highlighting key successes in design and preclinical prediction, as well as persistent obstacles to full-scale clinical integration. By illuminating these dynamics, we aim to chart a more efficient path forward in developing next-generation nanomedicine.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMachine LearningNanomedicineAnimalsHumansNanoparticlesartificial intelligencedrug deliverymachine learningnanomedicinepharmacokinetics

Identifiers

PMID40813104
PMCPMC12353477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.