ReviewPharmaceutics2025
A Review on the Structure-Response-Efficacy Optimization of Ultrasound-Responsive Micro/Nanobubbles for Cancer Therapy.
Review in Pharmaceutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Cancer Drug Delivery with Nanoparticles and Biomolecules: Stimuli-Responsive, Theranostic, and AI-Guided Approaches.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Nanoparticulate and Hydrogel Vehicles for Stimuli-Responsive and Sustained Controlled Release of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Review
- Ultrasound-mediated targeted micro/nanobubbles: breaking new boundaries in precision tumor therapy.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Emerging Nanoplatforms are Effective Against Tumor Hypoxia.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
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
Ultrasound-responsive micro/nanobubbles (MNBs) are promising tools for targeted cancer therapy due to their controllable acoustic activation and real-time imaging. Despite extensive research, the quantitative relationship between bubble structure, acoustic response, and therapeutic efficacy remains poorly understood. This knowledge gap hinders parametric design and clinical standardization. This review summarizes recent advances from an engineering perspective, highlighting how structural parameters-such as size, shell, gas core, and ligand density-affect acoustic sensitivity and drug release. Furthermore, the roles of microfluidic electroporation and cell membrane coating are discussed in terms of controllable fabrication and preservation of biological functions, highlighting their significance for reproducible and predictable therapies. In conclusion, this review establishes a "Structure-Response-Efficacy (S-R-E)" framework to summarize the core relationships between structural design and acoustic modulation. We propose an engineering strategy based on a standardized parameter system to guide the predictable design and clinical translation of ultrasound-based theranostic platforms.
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.