Defining Nano, Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine: Why Should It Matter?

Science and Engineering Ethics

Volumn 22, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 1255-1276

  Satalkar, Priya ^a   Elger, Bernice Simone ^a   Shaw, David M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Definition; Ethics; Nanomedicine; Nanotechnology; Qualitative research; Stakeholders

Indexed keywords

ECONOMICS; EUROPE; NANOMEDICINE; NANOTECHNOLOGY; NOMENCLATURE; NORTH AMERICA; RESEARCH; STANDARDS;

EUROPE; NANOMEDICINE; NANOTECHNOLOGY; NORTH AMERICA; RESEARCH; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC;

EID: 84941670456     PISSN: 13533452     EISSN: 14715546     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11948-015-9705-6     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Allhoff, F. (2009). The coming era of nanomedicine. The American Journal of Bioethics, 9(10), 3–11.
2. Anderson, J. A., & Kimmelman, J. (2014). Are phase 1 trials therapeutic? Risk, ethics, and division of labor. Bioethics, 28(3), 138–146.
3. Bawa, R. (2007). Patents and nanomedicine. Nanomedicine, 2(3), 351–374.
4. Bawa, R., Bawa, S., Maebius, S. B., Flynn, T., & Wei, C. (2005). Protecting new ideas and inventions in nanomedicine with patents. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine, 1(2), 150–158.
5. Bowen, G. A. (2008). Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: A research note. Qualitative research, 8(1), 137–152.
6. Bremer-Hoffmann, S., Amenta, V., & Rossi, F. (2015). Nanomedicines in the European translational process. European Journal of Nanomedicine, 7(3), 191–202.
7. Cacciatore, M. A. (2014). Public engagement: The benefits of communicating. Nature Nanotechnology, 9(10), 749.
8. Cormick, C. (2009). Piecing together the elephant: Public engagement on nanotechnology challenges. Science and Engineering Ethics, 15(4), 439–442.
9. Cormick, C. (2012). The complexity of public engagement. Nature Nanotechnology, 7(2), 77–78.
10. Cormick, C., & Hunter, S. (2014). Valuing values: Better public engagement on nanotechnology demands a better understanding of the diversity of publics. NanoEthics, 8(1), 57–71.
11. Devers, K. J., & Frenkel, R. M. (2000). Study design in qualitative research—2: Sampling and data collection strategies. Education for health, 13(2), 263–271.
12. Dresser, R. (2012). Building an ethical foundation for first-in-human nanotrials. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(4), 802–808.
13. Drexler, K. E. (2004). Nanotechnology: From Feynman to funding. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 24(1), 21–27.
14. Duncan, R., & Gaspar, R. (2011). Nanomedicine (s) under the microscope. Molecular Pharmaceutics, 8(6), 2101–2141.
15. Eaton, M. (2012). Improving the translation in Europe of nanomedicines (aka drug delivery) from academia to industry. Journal of Controlled Release, 164(3), 370–371.
16. Eaton, M., Levy, L., & Fontaine, O. M. (2015). Delivering nanomedicines to patients: A practical guide. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine, 11(4), 983–992.
17. Etheridge, M. L., Campbell, S. A., Erdman, A. G., Haynes, C. L., Wolf, S. M., & McCullough, J. (2013). The big picture on nanomedicine: The state of investigational and approved nanomedicine products. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine, 9(1), 1–14.
18. European Science Foundation. (2004). Nanomedicine—An ESF-European Medical Research Councils (EMRC) forward look report. Strasbourg Cedex, France.
19. European Technology Platform on NanoMedicine—Nanotechnology for Health. (2005). Vision paper and basis for a strategic research agenda for NanoMedicine. Luxembourg.
20. Ferrari, M., Philibert, M., & Sanhai, W. (2009). Nanomedicine and society. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 85(5), 466–467.
21. Hogle, L. F. (2012). Concepts of risk in nanomedicine research. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(4), 809–822.
22. Hug, K., & Hermerén, G. (2011). Which patient groups should be asked to participate in first-in-human trials of stem-cell-based therapies? The Journal of clinical ethics, 23(3), 256–271.
23. Kenen, R., Arden-Jones, A., & Eeles, R. (2004). Healthy women from suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families: The significant others in their lives. European Journal of Cancer Care, 13(2), 169–179.
24. Kimmelman, J., & John London, A. (2011). Predicting harms and benefits in translational trials: Ethics, evidence, and uncertainty. PLoS Medicine, 8(3), 355.
25. King, N. M. (2012). Nanomedicine first-in-human research: Challenges for informed consent. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(4), 823–830.
26. Kola, I., & Landis, J. (2004). Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 3(8), 711–716.
27. Kostarelos, K. (2006). The emergence of nanomedicine: A field in the making. Future Medicine, 1(1), 1–3.
28. Krabbenborg, L., & Mulder, H. A. (2015). Upstream public engagement in nanotechnology constraints and opportunities. Science Communication, 1075547015588601.
29. Lammers, T., Aime, S., Hennink, W. E., Storm, G., & Kiessling, F. (2011). Theranostic nanomedicine. Accounts of Chemical Research, 44(10), 1029–1038.
30. Lenk, C., & Biller-Andorno, N. (2007). Nanomedicine–emerging or re-emerging ethical issues? A discussion of four ethical themes. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 10(2), 173–184.
31. Master, Z., & Resnik, D. B. (2013). Hype and public trust in science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(2), 321–335.
32. McComas, K. A. (2012). Researcher views about funding sources and conflicts of interest in nanotechnology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(4), 699–717.
33. National Science and Technology Council. (2014). National nanotechnology initiative strategic plan. http://www.nano.gov/sites/default/files/pub_resource/2014_nni_strategic_plan.pdf. Accessed 13 Sep 2015.
34. Niemansburg, S. L., Van Delden, J. J., Dhert, W. J., & Bredenoord, A. L. (2013). Regenerative medicine interventions for orthopedic disorders: Ethical issues in the translation into patients. Regenerative Medicine, 8(1), 65–73.
35. Paull, R., Wolfe, J., Hébert, P., & Sinkula, M. (2003). Investing in nanotechnology. Nature Biotechnology, 21(10), 1144–1147.
36. Pidgeon, N., & Rogers-Hayden, T. (2007). Opening up nanotechnology dialogue with the publics: Risk communication or ‘upstream engagement’? Health, Risk & Society, 9(2), 191–210.
37. Priest, S. H. (2009). Risk communication for nanobiotechnology: To whom, about what, and why? The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 37(4), 759–769.
38. Ramachandran, G., Howard, J., Maynard, A., & Philbert, M. (2012). Handling worker and third-party exposures to nanotherapeutics during clinical trials. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(4), 856–864.
39. Resnik, D. B. (2011). Scientific research and the public trust. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(3), 399–409.
40. Resnik, D. B., & Tinkle, S. S. (2007). Ethical issues in clinical trials involving nanomedicine. Contemporary clinical trials, 28(4), 433–441.
41. Roco, M. C. (2005). International perspective on government nanotechnology funding in 2005. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 7(6), 707–712.
42. Roco, M. C. (2011). The long view of nanotechnology development: The National Nanotechnology Initiative at 10 years. In M. C. Roco, C. A. Mirkin, & M. C. Hersam (Eds.), Nanotechnology research directions for societal needs in 2020 (pp. 1–28). Netherlands: Springer.
43. Roco, M. C., Harthorn, B., Guston, D., & Shapira, P. (2011). Innovative and responsible governance of nanotechnology for societal development. In M. C. Roco, C. A. Mirkin, & M. C. Hersam (Eds.), Nanotechnology research directions for societal needs in 2020 (pp. 561–617). Netherlands: Springer.
44. Scheufele, D. A., Corley, E. A., Shih, T.-J., Dalrymple, K. E., & Ho, S. S. (2009). Religious beliefs and public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe and the United States. Nature Nanotechnology, 4(2), 91–94.
45. Spier, R. E., & Bird, S. J. (2003). On the management of funding of research in science and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 9(3), 298–300.
46. Tinkle, S., McNeil, S. E., Mühlebach, S., Bawa, R., Borchard, G., Barenholz, Y. C., et al. (2014). Nanomedicines: Addressing the scientific and regulatory gap. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1313(1), 35–56.
47. US Food and Drug Administration. (2014). Guidance for industry considering whether an FDA-regulated product involves the application of nanotechnology. Biotechnology Law Report, 30(5), 613–616.
48. Wagner, V., Dullaart, A., Bock, A.-K., & Zweck, A. (2006). The emerging nanomedicine landscape. Nature Biotechnology, 24(10), 1211–1217.