Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42198242›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutics2026

Safety, In Vivo Fate, and Degradation of MOF Nanomedicines: Toward Translational Evaluation.

Xiaohong Jing, Yuqian Ma, Yi Liu, Xingbin Yin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
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.

Xiaohong JingSchool of Chinese Materia Medica, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 102488, China.ORCID 0009-0002-8971-9910
Yuqian MaSchool of Chinese Materia Medica, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 301617, China.
Yi LiuSchool of Chinese Materia Medica, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 301617, China.
Xingbin YinSchool of Chinese Materia Medica, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 102488, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3077-1626

Funding

Beijing Natural Science Foundation 7262198National Natural Science Foundation of China 81703715
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are porous hybrid nanomaterials assembled from metal ions or clusters and organic ligands. Owing to their tunable structures, versatile compositions, and exceptional payload capacities, MOF-based systems have attracted increasing interest in drug delivery and theranostics. Yet, despite rapid progress in efficacy-focused studies, translational evaluation remains limited by incomplete evidence on safety, in vivo fate (pharmacokinetics), and degradation. This review examines MOF nanomedicines through a three-element evidence-chain framework and a four-level material evaluation and substantiation (MES) grading system to relate commonly reported endpoints to development-relevant questions. Major degradation patterns across representative MOF families are summarized, and the influence of surface engineering on safety, in vivo fate, and degradation is discussed. Representative studies are re-examined to illustrate how evidence gaps in these dimensions may affect translational interpretation. Key priorities for the field include dose standardization, quantitative in vivo evaluation, harmonized degradation assays, long-term and repeat-dose studies, and more consistent formulation reporting. By integrating these issues into a unified evidence-chain framework, this review aims to support a more comparable, interpretable, and development-relevant evaluation of MOF nanomedicine research.

Indexed as

degradationin vivo fatemetal–organic frameworkssafetysurface engineeringtranslational evaluation

Identifiers

PMID42198242
PMCPMC13211106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.