Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
International Journal of Drug Delivery Technology · October 23, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
This review presents a comparative analysis of three major classes of inorganic nanocarriers nanoclays, mesoporous silica nanoparticles, and carbon-based nanomaterials with emphasis on their structural and physical properties, drug release mechanisms, biocompatibility and toxicity, specific applications, and key surface modifications.Nanoclays offer natural abundance, high cation-exchange capacity, and versatile interlayer chemistry that enable sustained ion-exchange-driven release.Mesoporous silica nanoparticles are distinguished by their high surface area, ordered pore networks, and selectively functionalizable external and internal surfaces, supporting exceptionally high drug loading and stimuli-responsive release systems.Carbon-based carriers, including carbon nanotubes and graphene-family materials, combine large specific surface areas with photothermal capacity and dual drug-and gene-delivery potential, yet exhibit the most contested toxicity profile, largely governed by functionalization, purity, and exposure route.Across all three families, surface chemistry exemplified by PEGylation determines dispersion stability, biocompatibility, and circulation behavior.The three platforms are best viewed as complementary rather than competing, with future progress depending on standardized toxicological evaluation and continued refinement of surface engineering to translate these nanocarriers toward clinical applications in cancer therapy, gene therapy, and controlled drug delivery.