Nanotechnology offers a transformative approach in oncology by enabling targeted drug delivery and multifunctional platforms, though clinical translation remains inconsistent due to toxicity and regulatory hurdles.
Cancer remains a major global health challenge. Conventional therapies are often limited by poor tumor selectivity, systemic toxicity, multidrug resistance, and suboptimal pharmacokinetics. Nanotechnology offers a transformative approach in oncology. It enables targeted drug delivery, controlled or stimuli-responsive release, and multifunctional platforms that combine therapy and diagnostics. Nanoparticles enhance drug solubility, prolong circulation, and improve intracellular uptake. These advances are achieved through passive enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) and active targeting mechanisms. Despite robust preclinical success, clinical translation remains inconsistent. Factors such as pronounced inter- and intratumoral EPR variability, long-term toxicity or biodistribution concerns, immune recognition, and stringent regulatory or manufacturing hurdles contribute to high attrition rates. Approved nanomedicines, such as liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil ® ) and albumin-bound paclitaxel (Abraxane ® ), have achieved meaningful clinical impact. Others, such as thermosensitive liposomal doxorubicin (ThermoDox ® ), have shown variable or limited benefits. This gap highlights persistent differences between promise and performance. This review critically examines nanoparticle synthesis strategies (bottom-up, top-down, microfluidic, and green methods); structural and physicochemical characterization techniques; tumor-targeting mechanisms; and major classes of organic (liposomes, solid lipid nanoparticles, nanostructured lipid carriers, polymeric, micelles, dendrimers), inorganic (carbon-based, metallic, silica, magnetic), and hybrid nanocarriers. Emphasis is placed on mechanistic insights, comparative performance, and translational limitations. Key issues include batch-to-batch variability, lack of standardized nanotoxicology protocols, patient-specific heterogeneity, and regulatory challenges. This review aims to guide the successful integration of nanotechnology into precision cancer therapy.
Fahim et al. (2026) conducted a review in Cancer. Nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems vs. Conventional therapies was evaluated. Nanotechnology offers a transformative approach in oncology by enabling targeted drug delivery and multifunctional platforms, though clinical translation remains inconsistent due to toxicity and regulatory hurdles.