SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Role of Nanomedicine-Based Therapeutics in the Treatment of CNS Disorders.

Molecules · 2023-01-28

DOI: 10.3390/molecules28031283PMID: 36770950

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Central nervous system disorders, especially neurodegenerative diseases, are a public health priority and demand a strong scientific response. Various therapy procedures have been used in the past, but their therapeutic value has been insufficient. The blood-brain barrier (BBB) and the blood-cerebrospinal fluid barrier is two of the barriers that protect the central nervous system (CNS), but are the main barriers to medicine delivery into the CNS for treating CNS disorders, such as brain tumors, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and Huntington's disease. Nanotechnology-based medicinal approaches deliver valuable cargos targeting molecular and cellular processes with greater safety, efficacy, and specificity than traditional approaches. CNS diseases include a wide range of brain ailments connected to short- and long-term disability. They affect millions of people worldwide and are anticipated to become more common in the coming years. Nanotechnology-based brain therapy could solve the BBB problem. This review analyzes nanomedicine's role in medication delivery; immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and gene therapy are combined with nanomedicines to treat CNS disorders. We also evaluated nanotechnology-based approaches for CNS disease amelioration, with the intention of stimulating the immune system by delivering medications across the BBB.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.