ArticleDiscover oncology2025
Current progress and future trends in nanoparticle applications for lymphoma: a bibliometric analysis from 2004 to 2024.
Article in Discover oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLymphoma continues to pose a major global health challenge. While the application of nanoparticles (NPs) in lymphoma research has shown considerable promise, a comprehensive evaluation of research trends and the underlying knowledge structure remains lacking. This study aims to systematically evaluate the current progress and future trends in NP applications for lymphoma.
methodsWe performed a bibliometric analysis using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and R software on 1040 publications retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) between 2004 and 2024. Data on publications, countries, institutions, journals, authors, references, and keywords were analyzed.
resultsResearch output demonstrated a consistent upward trend, with China and the United States emerging as the leading contributors. The Chinese Academy of Sciences had the highest output, while the University of North Carolina led in citation impact. The International Journal of Nanomedicine published the most studies, whereas Nature Reviews Drug Discovery ranked first in citations. Partha Partim Manna was the most prolific author, and Jindrich Kopecek's work had the strongest influence. Our analysis revealed crucial research areas, including enhanced drug delivery, nanovaccines, nanodiagnostics and monitoring, green synthesis, and the optimization of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy.
conclusionThis bibliometric analysis suggests that several directions in NP applications for lymphoma may hold promise for near-term progress. NP-mediated chemotherapy and targeted therapy could improve drug delivery and help overcome resistance, while NP-based imaging agents may enhance sensitivity and enable real-time monitoring. The integration of NPs with CAR-T therapy may also offer strategies to improve efficacy and safety. Additional avenues, such as nanovaccines and green synthesis, highlight opportunities for immune modulation and biocompatibility. Despite notable translational challenges, multifunctional NP platforms may gradually contribute to advances in lymphoma management.
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.