ReviewInternational journal of bioprinting2023
Toward better drug development: Three-dimensional bioprinting in toxicological research.
Review in International journal of bioprinting, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond graphene: the MXene era in bioprinting.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Review
- Stem cell therapy: a novel frontier in the treatment of liver fibrosis/cirrhosis.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Review
- Functional Liver Cell-Based Platforms in Biomedical Research.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2025Review
- A 3D Bio-Printed-Based Model for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Multi-cellular engineered living systems to assess reproductive toxicology.Reproductive toxicology (Elmsford, N.Y.) · 2024Review
- Advances in Biomedical Applications of Solution Blow Spinning.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- High-throughput fabrication of cell spheroids with 3D acoustic assembly devices.International journal of bioprinting · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The importance of three-dimensional (3D) models in pharmacological tests and personalized therapies is significant. These models allow us to gain insight into the cell response during drug absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination in an organ-like system and are suitable for toxicological testing. In personalized and regenerative medicine, the precise characterization of artificial tissues or drug metabolism processes is more than crucial to gain the safest and the most effective treatment for the patients. Using these 3D cell cultures derived directly from patient, such as spheroids, organoids, and bioprinted structures, allows for testing drugs before administration to the patient. These methods allow us to select the most appropriate drug for the patient. Moreover, they provide chance for better recovery of patients, since time is not wasted during therapy switching. These models could be used in applied and basic research as well, because their response to treatments is quite similar to that of the native tissue. Furthermore, they may replace animal models in the future because these methods are cheaper and can avoid interspecies differences. This review puts a spotlight on this dynamically evolving area and its application in toxicological testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.