ReviewPharmaceutical research2026
Stimulus-Responsive Polymeric Carriers for Gene Delivery: Balancing Endosomal Escape with Nucleic Acid Release.
Review in Pharmaceutical research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPolymeric carriers for nucleic acid delivery must overcome two sequential intracellular barriers: escape from the endosome and release of the cargo into the cytosol. These steps are typically treated as independent design problems and optimized separately.
objectiveThis review argues that escape and release are coupled through the same electrostatic and pH-dependent interactions, creating a fundamental tradeoff . The cationic charge that enables a polymer to destabilize endosomal membranes also tightens its grip on the nucleic acid payload, so conditions favoring escape simultaneously inhibit release.
methodsWe trace this tradeoff across the major strategy classes in the polymeric delivery literature, evaluating each by where and when its trigger acts relative to the escape event. We further assess the assay toolkit for measuring escape and release, and the translational variables that shift the balance in vivo.
resultspH-responsive polymers tune the activation zone for membrane destabilization but cannot decouple escape from binding, since both depend on the same protonation events. Charge-shifting polymers address release more directly by programming a loss of cationic character after endosomal entry. Non-pH triggers, including disulfide, thioketal, diselenide, and esterase-responsive chemistries, off er orthogonal release mechanisms but face spatial and temporal alignment constraints. Characteristic failure modes recur: premature release, redundant triggering, and kinetic misalignment. No existing assay measures endosomal disruption and cargo release state simultaneously, and translational variables including protein corona formation, cell-type-dependent endosomal acidifi cation, and PEG shielding shift the balance in ways in vitro screening does not capture.
conclusionThe tradeoff cannot be resolved by chemistry alone, meaning the responsive trigger considered in isolation. Its resolution requires coordination across spatial (architectural domain segregation), temporal (kinetic alignment of escape and release), and formulation-level (N/P ratio, PEG density, formation pH) design axes.
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.