Cited by 1,288Nanoparticle-Based Drug DeliveryNanoplatforms for cancer theranosticsRNA Interference and Gene Delivery

To exploit the tumor microenvironment: Since the EPR effect fails in the clinic, what is the future of nanomedicine?

Danhier, F.·2016·Journal of Controlled Release

Abstract

Tumor targeting by nanomedicine-based therapeutics has emerged as a promising approach to overcome the lack of specificity of conventional chemotherapeutic agents and to provide clinicians the ability to overcome shortcomings of current cancer treatment. The major underlying mechanism of the design of nanomedicines was the Enhanced Permeability and Retention (EPR) effect, considered as the "royal gate" in the drug delivery field. However, after the publication of thousands of research papers, the verdict has been handed down: the EPR effect works in rodents but not in humans! Thus the basic rationale of the design and development of nanomedicines in cancer therapy is failing making it necessary to stop claiming efficacy gains via the EPR effect, while tumor targeting cannot be proved in the clinic. It is probably time to dethrone the EPR effect and to ask the question: what is the future of nanomedicines without the EPR effect? The aim of this review is to provide a general overview on (i) the current state of the EPR effect, (ii) the future of nanomedicine and (iii) the strategies of modulation of the tumor microenvironment to improve the delivery of nanomedicine.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.11.015

Cites

108 of 108 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Optimization of nanomedicine design to enhance the EPR effect is one of the strategies proposed, as well as combination with external stimuli, including ultrasounds, radiotherapy or hyperthermia or usage of nanomedicine modified with cell-penetrating peptides.

    “Optimization of nanomedicine design to enhance the EPR effect is also one of the strategies that are proposed, as well as a combination of the nanomedicine with the external stimuli, including ultrasounds, radiotherapy or hyperthermia or usage of nanomedicine modified with the cell-penetrating peptides [157].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Danhier, F.
Affiliations
UCLouvain (BE)
Corresponding author
Danhier, F.
Venue
Journal of Controlled Release
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
244
Issue
Pt A
Pages
108-121
ISSN
0168-3659 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2549628327
Cited by
1,288
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 91 · 2025: 101 · 2024: 113 · 2023: 130 · 2022: 153 · 2021: 197 · 2020: 208 · 2019: 125 · 2018: 102 · 2017: 57
FWCI
5.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Controlled Release (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fonds National de la recherché Scientifique (F.R.S.-FNRS)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Nanoplatforms for cancer theranostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Keywords
tumor microenvironment, enhanced permeability and retention effect, nanomedicine, anticancer drug delivery, tumor targeting, nanoparticle delivery
MeSH terms
Tumor Hypoxia, Antineoplastic Agents, Extracellular Matrix, Humans, Neoplasms, Permeability, Biomarkers, Tumor, Drug Delivery Systems, Nanostructures, Nanomedicine, Tumor Microenvironment

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