Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Acs Nano Medicine · November 4, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Abstract From the vantage point of the oncology clinic, the barriers keeping promising nanomedicines from patients look different than they appear from the research bench. Despite decades of preclinical progress, few patients are treated with nanoparticle-based therapies. This gap has two sides: well-characterized scientific obstacles, and a less-discussed set of clinical barriers that even a high-performing nanomedicine must overcome. In this Perspective, written from the viewpoint of a practicing oncologist, I argue that patient-centered design can mitigate some of these barriers and identify new opportunities for nanomedicine. I outline four principles that prioritize clinical impact: synergizing with the standard of care, advancing immuno-oncology combinations, embracing rare cancers, and improving supportive care. Bridging this gap will require clinicians, engineers, life and physical scientists, and industry partners to work together and adopt shared principles that put patients first.