Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery Systems for Tumor Treatment: Advancing Solutions to Overcome Drug Resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential of nanoparticles (NPs) as a drug delivery mechanism (DDM) has prompted extensive study and use of nanotechnology in tumor cell (TC) treatment. Compared to conventional medications, NP-based DDM offers greater stability and biocompatibility, enhanced absorption and preservation, and focused accuracy, which are some of its unique advantages. This drug-carrying technology has reached a new level with the use and improvement of composite nanoparticles (NPs), which combine the unique characteristics of multiple NPs. Additionally, NP-based DDMs have demonstrated effectiveness in overcoming cancer-related drug resistance (DR). Improving medical translation must address limited dose capacity, stability limitations, and potential harmful effects. Researchers are exploring ways to enhance DDM, including the development of novel drug-encapsulating techniques and modifications to NP surfaces. Potentially huge gains in treatment efficacy may result from optimizing medication integration in such systems. One obstacle to medical translation is stability issues. Applying protective covers and improving formulations are two methods that researchers are exploring to extend the lifespan of NPs. Additionally, before progressing with clinical trials, efforts are being made to minimize the likelihood of negative side effects by carefully selecting compounds that are biologically compatible for NP synthesis and conducting comprehensive toxicity evaluations. Following that, we continue with the innovation of nanoparticle design and functionalization; these types of delivery systems are poised to play a key role in various areas of next-generation tumour therapies. Which provides various offers through robust pathways to overcoming drug resistance, accelerating clinical translation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".