ArticleNanotechnology, science and applications2026
Parenteral Berberine vs Cisplatin- Loaded Lipid Nanoparticles - Development, Characterisation, Comparative Safety Profiling and Cytotoxicity in Cholangiocarcinoma Cell Models.
Article in Nanotechnology, science and applications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Berberine in Cancer Therapy: Recent Advances.Archiv der Pharmazie · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is an aggressive and heterogeneous malignancy of the biliary tract with a poor prognosis. Berberine can be a therapeutic option with low toxicity, but its delivery remains challenging. Encapsulation in lipid nanoparticles offers a promising biocompatible strategy to improve the delivery and safety of berberine. Purpose: This study aimed to develop, characterize berberine-loaded nanostructured lipid carriers (N-Ber) and evaluate their cytotoxicity in CCA cell models in comparison to a standard chemotherapeutic, cisplatin, in both free and nanoparticle-loaded form (N-Cis). The in vitro biocompatibility for potential parenteral delivery of the nanocarriers was a secondary goal of the work. Methods: Nanoparticles were prepared by solvent evaporation with Precirol 5 ATO and oleic acid as lipids and Tween 20 as a stabilizer and were characterized by DLS, morphology, encapsulation efficiency, and in vitro drug release at physiological (pH 7.4) and tumor-mimicking (pH 5.5) conditions. Cytotoxicity was evaluated in three CCA cell lines (TFK-1, EGI-1, and HuCCT1) using the MTT assay, while endothelial cells (Ea.hy926) and the hemolysis test in human erythrocytes were employed to evaluate safety. Results: N-Ber and N-Cis displayed mean sizes 159.5 nm and 146.7 nm, respectively, negative surface charge (-27.95 mV and -50.75 mV), and high encapsulation efficiencies (berberine: 88.8%; cisplatin: 95.8%). Both nanoformulations showed significantly altered dissolution profiles compared to the free drugs. Berberine showed potent cytotoxicity against all CCA cell lines (IC Discussion: N-Ber combines strong cytotoxicity in CCA cells with a favorable biocompatibility compared to N-Cis. The promising in vitro data warrant further in vivo evaluation.
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.