4.8 Review

Evolution and clinical translation of drug delivery nanomaterials

期刊

NANO TODAY
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 91-106

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nantod.2017.06.008

关键词

Drug delivery; Inorganic nanomaterial; Polymeric nanomaterial; Liposomes; Clinical trials; FDA approval

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [AR057837, DE021468, D005865, AR068258, AR066193, EB022403, EB021148, R01EB024403]
  2. Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE)
  3. National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health Pathway to Independence [K99CA201603]
  4. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF)
  5. TUBITAK - Turkey
  6. Belgian American Educational Foundation (BAEF)
  7. King Baudouin Foundation (KBS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the advent of technology, the role of nanomaterials in medicine has grown exponentially in the last few decades. The main advantage of such materials has been exploited in drug delivery applications, due to their effective targeting that in turn reduces systemic toxicity compared to the conventional routes of drug administration. Even though these materials offer broad flexibility based on targeting tissue, disease, and drug payload, the demand for more effective yet highly biocompatible nanomaterial-based drugs is increasing. While therapeutically improved and safe materials have been introduced in nanomedicine platforms, issues related to their degradation rate and bio-distribution still exist, thus making their successful translation to clinical application very challenging. Researchers are constantly improving upon novel nanomaterials that are safer and more effective not only as therapeutic agents but as diagnostic tools as well, making the research in the field of nanomedicine ever more fascinating. In this review, the stress has been made on the evolution of nanomaterials that are under different stages of clinical trials or have been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据