SynthesisUltrasonics sonochemistry2026
Advances in ultrasound-activated nano-sonosensitizers for cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Ultrasonics sonochemistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultrasound (US)-activated nanotherapies represent a transformative frontier in oncology, leveraging the noninvasive deep penetration of acoustic energy for targeted tumor destruction. However, this field lacks a quantitative synthesis to guide the rational design of sono-sensitizing nanoparticles (NPs) and the optimization of therapeutic protocols. To address this issue, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of 144 recent research reports, establishing an evidence-based design hierarchy for nano-sonosensitizers. A meta-analysis of 86 in vitro studies revealed a profound synergistic reduction in cell viability when NPs were activated by US (pooled standard mean difference, SMD = -13.16, 95% CI [-14.67, -11.64], p < 0.001). NP size was the most influential design factor. Particles smaller than 50 nm showing the greatest effect in vitro (SMD = -13.32) and strongest tumor reduction in vivo (SMD = 5), a finding consistent with optimal exploitation of the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect for tumor accumulation. Specific roles of materials were identified: polymeric NPs excelled in drug delivery (SMD = -19.36 versus US alone), while inorganic NPs served as direct sonocatalysts. This work provides a definitive quantitative framework to advance US-activated nanotherapy from exploratory discovery to clinical precision. To realize this potential, we recommend the adoption of standardized acoustic dosimetry and material characterization and inclusion of safety studies (ISO 10993. We hope that this review will accelerate the development of fundamental studies and therapeutic US applications for sonosensitizing NPs.
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.