4.5 Article

DELIVERY OF PHARMACEUTICS TO BONE: NANOTECHNOLOGIES, HIGH-THROUGHPUT PROCESSING AND IN SILICO MATHEMATICAL MODELS

期刊

EUROPEAN CELLS & MATERIALS
卷 31, 期 -, 页码 355-381

出版社

AO RESEARCH INSTITUTE DAVOS-ARI
DOI: 10.22203/eCM.v031a23

关键词

Bone tissue engineering; targeted drug delivery strategies; biomaterials; high-throughput processing technology; in silico tools; nanotechnology

资金

  1. FEDER - Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional funds through COMPETE 2020 - Operacional Programme for Competitiveness and Internationalisation (POCI), Portugal
  2. Portuguese funds through FCT - Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia/Ministerio da Ciencia, Tecnologia e Inovacao of the project Institute for Research and Innovation in Health Sciences [POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007274]
  3. FCT [IS- SFRH/ BPD/75285/2010, CJ- SFRH / BPD / 63618 / 2009, E - SFRH/BD/81152/2011]
  4. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/81152/2011, SFRH/BPD/75285/2010, SFRH/BPD/63618/2009] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the last decade, nanobiotechnology research has emerged as a revolutionising new approach to the 21st century pharmaceutical challenges, offering valuable gains in a vast set of biomedical applications. In the field of bone tissue engineering, a broad range of nanotechnology-based delivery systems have been researched and the most recent developments in high-throughput technology and in silico approaches are creating very high expectations. This review presents a comprehensive overview of the emergent nanotechnology-based materials, processing techniques and research strategies for the delivery of pharmaceutics to bone including the materials general characteristics and the available drug delivery systems to distribute agents systemically or locally. Complementary to what was stated above, it also reviews the latest high-throughput processing techniques and the existent in silico tools (mathematical and computational models) used to help on the design of delivery systems.

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

4.5
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