The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Challenges and strategies in anti-cancer nanomedicine development: An industry perspective
Open accessAbstract
Successfully translating anti-cancer nanomedicines from pre-clinical proof of concept to demonstration of therapeutic value in the clinic is challenging. Having made significant advances with drug delivery technologies, we must learn from other areas of oncology drug development, where patient stratification and target-driven design have improved patient outcomes. We should evolve our nanomedicine development strategies to build the patient and disease into the line of sight from the outset. The success of small molecule targeted therapies has been significantly improved by employing a specific decision-making framework, such as AstraZeneca's 5R principle: right target/efficacy, right tissue/exposure, right safety, right patient, and right commercial potential. With appropriate investment and collaboration to generate a platform of evidence supporting the end clinical application, a similar framework can be established for enhancing nanomedicine translation and performance. Building informative data packages to answer these questions requires the following: (I) an improved understanding of the heterogeneity of clinical cancers and of the biological factors influencing the behaviour of nanomedicines in patient tumours; (II) a transition from formulation-driven research to disease-driven development; (III) the implementation of more relevant animal models and testing protocols; and (IV) the pre-selection of the patients most likely to respond to nanomedicine therapies. These challenges must be overcome to improve (the cost-effectiveness of) nanomedicine development and translation, and they are key to establishing superior therapies for patients.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Principles of nanoparticle design for overcoming biological barriers to drug delivery
Blanco, E., Shen, H., & Ferrari, M. (2015) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3330 · Cited by 7,002
Molecular mechanisms and clinical applications of angiogenesis
Carmeliet, P., & Jain, R. K. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10144 · Cited by 5,467
Doxil® — The first FDA-approved nano-drug: Lessons learned
Barenholz, Y. (. (2012) · Journal of Controlled Release · doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2012.03.020 · Cited by 4,792
Accumulation of sub-100 nm polymeric micelles in poorly permeable tumours depends on size
Cabral, H., Matsumoto, Y., Mizuno, K., Chen, Q., Murakami, M., Kimura, M., Terada, Y., Kano, M. R., Miyazono, K., Uesaka, M., et al. (2011) · Nature Nanotechnology · doi:10.1038/nnano.2011.166 · Cited by 2,429
Engineered Nanoparticles for Drug Delivery in Cancer Therapy
Sun, T., Zhang, Y. S., Pang, B., Hyun, D. C., Yang, M., & Xia, Y. (2014) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201403036 · Cited by 2,164
Lessons learned from the fate of AstraZeneca's drug pipeline: a five-dimensional framework
Cook, D., Brown, D., Alexander, R., March, R., Morgan, P., Satterthwaite, G., & Pangalos, M. N. (2014) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd4309 · Cited by 1,344
Maeda, H. (2015) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2015.01.002 · Cited by 1,179
Chauhan, V. P., Stylianopoulos, T., Martin, J. D., Popović, Z., Chen, O., Kamoun, W. S., Bawendi, M. G., Fukumura, D., & Jain, R. K. (2012) · Nature Nanotechnology · doi:10.1038/nnano.2012.45 · Cited by 1,101
The big picture on nanomedicine: the state of investigational and approved nanomedicine products
Etheridge, M. L., Campbell, S. A., Erdman, A. G., Haynes, C. L., Wolf, S. M., & McCullough, J. (2013) · Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.nano.2012.05.013 · Cited by 1,088
Cancer cells compress intratumour vessels
Padera, T. P., Stoll, B. R., Tooredman, J. B., Capen, D., Tomaso, E. D., & Jain, R. K. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/427695a · Cited by 857
Cited by
Danhier, F. (2016) · Journal of Controlled Release · doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.11.015 · Cited by 1,288
Tumor targeting via EPR: Strategies to enhance patient responses
Golombek, S. K., May, J.-N., Theek, B., Appold, L., Drude, N., Kiessling, F., & Lammers, T. (2018) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2018.07.007 · Cited by 1,262
Strategies for delivering therapeutics across the blood–brain barrier
Terstappen, G. C., Meyer, A. H., Bell, R. D., & Zhang, W. (2021) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/s41573-021-00139-y · Cited by 1,138
Ghezzi, M., Pescina, S., Padula, C., Santi, P., Del Favero, E., Cantù, L., & Nicoli, S. (2021) · Journal of Controlled Release · doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.02.031 · Cited by 1,135
Smart nanocarrier-based drug delivery systems for cancer therapy and toxicity studies: A review
Hossen, S., Hossain, M. K., Basher, M. K., Mia, M. N. H., Rahman, M. T., & Uddin, M. J. (2019) · Journal of Advanced Research · doi:10.1016/j.jare.2018.06.005 · Cited by 998
Metadata
- Authors
- Hare, J. I., Lammers, T., Ashford, M. B., Puri, S., Storm, G., & Barry, S. T.
- Venue
- Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-01
- Volume
- 108
- Pages
- 25-38
- ISSN
- 0169-409X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2344850880
- Cited by
- 1,214
- References
- 21
- FWCI
- 3.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Challenges and strategies in anti-cancer nanomedicine development: An industry perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.addr.2016.04.025
- The paper
- Hare, J. I., Lammers, T., Ashford, M. B., Puri, S., Storm, G., & Barry, S. T. (2017). Challenges and strategies in anti-cancer nanomedicine development: An industry perspective. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2016.04.025
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
