Cited by 31Nanoparticle-Based Drug DeliveryNanoplatforms for cancer theranosticsElectron Spin Resonance Studies

EPR Effect-Based Tumor Targeted Nanomedicine: A Promising Approach for Controlling Cancer

Open access
Fang, Jun·2022·Journal of Personalized Medicine

Abstract

Cancer remains the major threat to human health in most advanced countries in the world [...]

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/jpm12010095

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 EPR effect is a unique feature of solid tumors related to defective vascular architecture, large endothelial gaps, abundant vascular mediators, VEGF, and diminished lymphatic recovery.

    “The EPR effect is a unique feature of solid tumors related to characteristics of tumors including defective vascular architecture, large space between endothelial cells in blood vessels, abundant vascular mediators, vascular endothelial growth factor, and diminished lymphatic recovery.”

    From Approaches to Improve EPR-Based Drug Delivery for Cancer Therapy and Diagnosis (2023) · cites this paper as [4]

    The paper’s main text (page unavailable) describes the EPR effect as arising from leaky tumor vessels with defective endothelial architecture and high levels of vascular mediators, including VEGF. It does not specifically describe large gaps between endothelial cells or diminished lymphatic recovery; those details are not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Tumor blood vessels are leaky compared to normal blood vessels due to defective endothelial cells and more vascular permeability, resulting in selective accumulation of nanodrugs into tumor tissues with little or no distribution in normal cells.

    “Therefore, tumor blood vessels are leaky compared to normal blood vessels due to the defective endothelial cells and more vascular permeability, as well as vastly expressed vascular mediators including bradykinin, NO, and VEGF, resulting in selective accumulation of nanodrugs into tumor tissues with little or no distribution in normal cells [4].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fang, J.
Affiliations
Sojo University (JP)
Corresponding author
Fang, Jun
Venue
Journal of Personalized Medicine
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-01-12
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
95
ISSN
2075-4426 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4205691718
Cited by
31
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Personalized Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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 › Biophysics › Electron Spin Resonance Studies
Keywords
enhanced permeability and retention effect, cancer therapy, nanoparticle drug delivery, 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