3D- and 4D-Printed Nano-Enabled Soft Robots for Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy: Materials, Manufacturing, Image Guidance, and Translational Validation.
4 affiliations
- 1Department of Chemistry, Duksung Women's University, Seoul 01369, Republic of Korea.
- 2SimVista Inc., A-13, 194-25 Osongsaengmyeong 1-ro, Osong-eup, Heungdeok-gu, Cheongju 28160, Republic of Korea.
- 3Department of Biomedical Sciences, Chonnam National University Medical School, 264 Seoyang-ro, Hwasun 58128, Republic of Korea.
- 4Department of Life Science, Dongguk University-Seoul, 32 Dongguk-ro, Ilsandong-gu, Goyang 10326, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) and four-dimensional (4D) printing expand the design space for nano-enabled soft robots intended for cancer diagnosis and therapy. This structured narrative review separates three evidence classes: core systems satisfying all scope criteria, adjacent technologies satisfying only part of the definition, and enabling technologies not yet integrated as oncology soft robots. The revised evidence set contains 12 core reports, 7 adjacent comparators and 68 enabling methods, standards or background reports. Study-level analysis using independent manufacturing, biological, workflow and safety (M/B/W/S) axes shows that the core literature is dominated by single-platform, in vitro therapeutic demonstrations with absent or short-term safety evidence (S0-S1). No core study established cancer-specific diagnostic sensitivity or specificity, no human validation was identified, and only two systems were classified as genuine or candidate 4D platforms under a strict programmed-transformation definition. Hydrogel, magnetic, photothermal, conductive, imaging-active and melanin-based materials are evaluated together with printability, dose, localization, sterilization, retrieval, degradation and nanoparticle fate. Translation requires reproducible manufacture, quantitative application endpoints, exposure-matched safety testing and comparison with established oncology workflows. The principal gap is not the availability of additional functions, but the lack of integrated evidence connecting controlled manufacture to clinically meaningful diagnosis or therapy. These findings apply only to the studies identified within the predefined search and eligibility framework and do not establish the absence of relevant evidence elsewhere.
Related
- An Improved Manufacturing Method for Infusible Extracellular Matrix Materials to Enable Efficient Scale-Up, Improved Efficacy, and Clinical Translation
- Current translational perspectives for diagnosis and individualized therapy in rare genetic diseases
- Design and validation of a GMP-compliant manufacturing platform of extracellular vesicles from mesenchymal stromal cells
- Identification and In Vitro Validation of Metabolic Reprogramming-Related Hub Genes for the Diagnosis of Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
- Preclinical mouse models of multiple myeloma: a clinically oriented guide to model selection, validation, and translational application
BibTeX
@article{han20264dprinted,
title = {{3D- and 4D-Printed Nano-Enabled Soft Robots for Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy: Materials, Manufacturing, Image Guidance, and Translational Validation.}},
author = {Ye Ri Han and Sang Bong Lee},
journal = {Biosensors},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.3390/bios16100546},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42930093},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - 3D- and 4D-Printed Nano-Enabled Soft Robots for Cancer Diagnosis and Therapy: Materials, Manufacturing, Image Guidance, and Translational Validation.
AU - Ye Ri Han
AU - Sang Bong Lee
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/01
JO - Biosensors
DO - 10.3390/bios16100546
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42930093
AB - Three-dimensional (3D) and four-dimensional (4D) printing expand the design space for nano-enabled soft robots intended for cancer diagnosis and therapy. This structured narrative review separates three evidence classes: core systems satisfying all scope criteria, adjacent technologies satisfying only part of the definition, and enabling technologies not yet integrated as oncology soft robots. The revised evidence set contains 12 core reports, 7 adjacent comparators and 68 enabling methods, standards or background reports. Study-level analysis using independent manufacturing, biological, workflow and safety (M/B/W/S) axes shows that the core literature is dominated by single-platform, in vitro therapeutic demonstrations with absent or short-term safety evidence (S0-S1). No core study established cancer-specific diagnostic sensitivity or specificity, no human validation was identified, and only two systems were classified as genuine or candidate 4D platforms under a strict programmed-transformation definition. Hydrogel, magnetic, photothermal, conductive, imaging-active and melanin-based materials are evaluated together with printability, dose, localization, sterilization, retrieval, degradation and nanoparticle fate. Translation requires reproducible manufacture, quantitative application endpoints, exposure-matched safety testing and comparison with established oncology workflows. The principal gap is not the availability of additional functions, but the lack of integrated evidence connecting controlled manufacture to clinically meaningful diagnosis or therapy. These findings apply only to the studies identified within the predefined search and eligibility framework and do not establish the absence of relevant evidence elsewhere.
SN - 2079-6374
ER -