ReviewChemical science2026
Nanomedical approaches to deplete intracellular glutathione in oncology.
Review in Chemical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An all-in-one theranostic platform for enhanced TACE: self-developing embolization with dual-targeted arsenic trioxide delivery.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Article
- Nanodynamic Therapy in Colorectal Cancer: Engineering Precision Immunotherapy and Multimodal Synergy.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
Glutathione (GSH) plays a critical role in maintaining redox homeostasis and conferring chemoresistance to cancer cells, making it an attractive target for therapeutic intervention. Recent advances in nanomedicine have led to the development of diverse nanostructures capable of depleting GSH, either stoichiometrically or catalytically. These systems exploit the elevated GSH demand in tumors to selectively disrupt redox balance, enhancing reactive oxygen species (ROS) accumulation and improving the efficacy of conventional therapies. Approaches include metal-based nanocatalysts, GSH-responsive prodrugs, and stimuli-activated platforms using light or ultrasound for spatiotemporal control. Despite promising preclinical outcomes, key challenges remain, including limited mechanistic understanding, variability in GSH sensitivity across cancer types, and a lack of standardized assays to evaluate GSH-depleting efficiency. Addressing these gaps will require cross-disciplinary efforts bridging materials science, chemical biology, and catalysis. Such integration is essential for translating GSH-targeting nanomedicines into effective clinical tools against drug-resistant malignancies. This perspective provides an overview of some of the most promising nanomaterials explored in the current state of the art and discusses the main strategies and challenges relevant to future clinical translation.
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.