Cited by 169Nanoparticle-Based Drug DeliveryAdvanced Drug Delivery SystemsDendrimers and Hyperbranched Polymers

Leveraging Physiology for Precision Drug Delivery

Sun, Wujin, Hu, Quanyin, Ji, Wenyan, Wright, Grace, Gu, Zhen·2017·Physiological Reviews

Abstract

Physiological characteristics of diseases bring about both challenges and opportunities for targeted drug delivery. Various drug delivery platforms have been devised ranging from macro- to micro- and further into the nanoscopic scale in the past decades. Recently, the favorable physicochemical properties of nanomaterials, including long circulation, robust tissue and cell penetration attract broad interest, leading to extensive studies for therapeutic benefits. Accumulated knowledge about the physiological barriers that affect the in vivo fate of nanomedicine has led to more rational guidelines for tailoring the nanocarriers, such as size, shape, charge, and surface ligands. Meanwhile, progresses in material chemistry and molecular pharmaceutics generate a panel of physiological stimuli-responsive modules that are equipped into the formulations to prepare “smart” drug delivery systems. The capability of harnessing physiological traits of diseased tissues to control the accumulation of or drug release from nanomedicine has further improved the controlled drug release profiles with a precise manner. Successful clinical translation of a few nano-formulations has excited the collaborative efforts from the research community, pharmaceutical industry, and the public towards a promising future of smart drug delivery.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/physrev.00015.2016

Cites

45 of 45 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?

  • The blood-brain barrier rejects most small molecule drugs and large therapeutic molecules including growth factors and antibodies due to its barrier function and highly effective active efflux systems.

    “First, with its barrier function and highly effective active efflux systems, the BBB rejects most of the small molecule drugs and large therapeutic molecules including growth factors and antibodies (42, 567, 682).”

    From Blood-Brain Barrier: From Physiology to Disease and Back (2019) · cites this paper as [567]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sun, W., Hu, Q., Ji, W., Wright, G., & Gu, Z.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
Physiological Reviews
Published
2017-01
Volume
97
Issue
1
Pages
189-225
ISSN
  • 0031-9333 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1210
OpenAlex
W2551124141
Cited by
169
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Physiological Reviews (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • NC TraCS
  • NIH (1UL1TR001111)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Biomaterials › Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Polymers and Plastics › Dendrimers and Hyperbranched Polymers
Keywords
precision drug delivery, nanomedicine, nanocarriers, physiological barriers, stimuli-responsive drug delivery, controlled drug release, tissue penetration, clinical translation of nanomedicine

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