Magnetoelectric Nanoparticles for Remote-Triggered Hyperthermia and On-Demand Drug Release in Precision Oncology

Monochura Saha; Shubham Yadav

doi:10.5772/intechopen.1014228

Abstract

Magnetoelectric nanoparticles (MENPs) represent an emergent class of multifunctional nanomaterials poised to redefine the landscape of precision oncology. As composite nanostructures, typically comprising a magnetostrictive core and a piezoelectric shell, MENPs possess the unique ability to couple magnetic and electric fields at the nanoscale. This phenomenon, known as the magnetoelectric (ME) effect, enables them to function as wireless nano-transducers, converting externally applied tissue-penetrating magnetic fields into localized, biologically potent electric fields. This chapter provides an exhaustive analysis of the application of MENPs in two transformative therapeutic modalities: remote-triggered hyperthermia and on-demand drug release. A detailed exposition of the underlying physics of the strain-mediated ME effect is presented, alongside a review of the materials science, synthesis, and characterization of these advanced nanoparticles. The chapter elucidates the novel mechanisms by which MENPs achieve high-specificity cancer cell targeting through nano-electroporation and subsequent intracellular drug release triggered by distinct magnetic field modalities. Furthermore, it explores the complex thermal phenomena within MENPs, proposing a multimodal model of hyperthermia that includes not only conventional magnetic relaxation losses but also localized Joule heating and potential piezo-photonic effects. The synergistic potential of combining chemo and thermotherapy using a single MENP vector is discussed, highlighting the platform’s inherent theragnostic capabilities for image-guided treatment and real-time therapeutic monitoring. Finally, the chapter concludes with a critical assessment of the significant challenges, including long-term biocompatibility, manufacturing scalability, and regulatory navigation, that must be surmounted to facilitate the clinical translation of this promising technology.

Keywords

magnetoelectric nanoparticles
precision oncology
remote-triggered hyperthermia
on-demand drug release
field-controlled molecular actuation

Author Information

Show +

Monochura Saha
- Media Lab Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA
- Birla Institute of Technology Mesra, Ranchi, India
Shubham Yadav *
- Media Lab Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA

*Address all correspondence to: shyadav@mit.edu

1. Introduction

Over the past two decades, nanotechnology has revolutionized biomedical research by demonstrating how the unique physicochemical properties of micro- and nanoparticles (NPs) can be leveraged in diagnostics and therapy [1–6]. Their small size, high surface-to-volume ratio, and tunable surface properties make nanoparticles highly versatile, allowing them to interact with biological systems in ways that bulk materials cannot [7–9]. These features have sparked broad interest in their use for environmental, pharmaceutical, and biomedical applications, particularly in scenarios that require precision, reactivity, and mobility within complex biological environments [10–12].

A central focus of this progress has been magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs), which serve as the foundation for magnetic drug delivery systems [13, 14]. The MNPs can be guided by external magnetic fields for site-specific therapy, while also offering opportunities for controlled drug release, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and hyperthermia [15–18]. By functionalizing their surfaces with biomolecules, ligands, or therapeutic payloads, MNPs can achieve enhanced biocompatibility, improved pharmacokinetics, and more selective biodistribution, addressing one of the key challenges in nanomedicine: minimizing off-target effects while maximizing therapeutic impact [19–24].

Building on these advances, magnetoelectric nanoparticles (MENPs) represent the next generation of smart nanomaterials [25]. The MENPs uniquely combine magnetostrictive and piezoelectric phases, enabling them to convert magnetic stimuli into localized electric fields and vice versa [26–28]. This dual response offers new possibilities for remote and non-invasive biomedical interventions [28]. Unlike traditional magnetic nanoparticles, MENPs exhibit a significant magnetoelectric (ME) effect, making them particularly suitable for applications that require both targeting and controlled stimulation, such as hyperthermia therapy, drug delivery, nano-electroporation, and neuromodulation. In this chapter, we focused on the first two [29].

Typically synthesized as core-shell nanocomposites, MENPs integrate a magnetostrictive core that converts magnetic fields into mechanical strain with a piezoelectric shell that transforms this strain into electric polarization [26]. Fabrication techniques like hydrothermal growth and sol-gel processing optimize interfacial coupling, which is crucial for enhancing the ME voltage coefficient and overall efficiency [30–32].

Recent studies highlight their potential across a spectrum of applications. In oncology, MENPs can be guided magnetically to tumor sites while releasing anticancer agents under controlled stimuli and inducing localized heating for hyperthermia-based cell ablation [33, 34]. In neurology, they have been investigated as wireless nanoelectrodes capable of modulating brain activity or mapping neural circuits through the inverse ME effect. Their responsiveness, biocompatibility, and ability to cross biological barriers position them as promising candidates for next-generation theragnostic platforms and nanomaterials that integrate therapy with real-time diagnosis [35–37].

In addition, MENPs offer several advantages over conventional cancer treatment approaches. Traditional therapies such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and photodynamic therapy face significant challenges in clinical settings. Chemotherapy often causes severe systemic toxicity and off-target effects due to poor biodistribution of anticancer agents, while radiotherapy carries risks of damaging healthy tissues and secondary cancer induction, and photodynamic therapy is limited by poor tissue penetration [38–40]. In contrast, MENP-based approaches offer distinct advantages for precision oncology through complementary mechanisms. External magnetic fields penetrate the entire human body without attenuation, enabling treatment of deep-seated tumors while providing ultra-localized thermal treatment that minimizes damage to surrounding healthy tissues [41]. Simultaneously, the piezoelectric phase of MENPs generates localized electric fields that can trigger on-demand drug release through electric field effects, enabling controlled delivery of anticancer agents directly at the tumor microenvironment with minimal systemic exposure [42, 43]. This synergistic combination of magnetic targeting, controlled hyperthermia, and/or triggered drug release offers superior therapeutic efficacy compared to conventional therapeutic strategies.

In this chapter, we explore the design, synthesis, and biomedical applications of magnetoelectric nanoparticles, with a particular emphasis on their role in drug delivery and hyperthermia therapy (summarized in Figure 1). We examine the fundamental mechanisms driving magnetoelectric coupling at the nanoscale, review experimental strategies for enhancing efficacy and biocompatibility, and evaluate their potential in addressing current challenges in cancer treatment and targeted therapeutics. By highlighting both opportunities and limitations, this chapter aims to provide a comprehensive overview of MENPs as multifunctional agents at the frontier of nanomedicine.

Figure 1.
Multidisciplinary framework for magnetoelectric nanoparticle (MENP) development and applications. The central core illustrates the interconnected research domains essential for MENP advancement: synthesis methods for particle fabrication, physics principles governing magnetoelectric coupling, and characterization techniques for material validation. The outer ring highlights primary therapeutic applications, including hyperthermia for localized heating and on-demand drug release systems for controlled therapeutic delivery.

2. The physics of magnetoelectric nanoparticles

The defining characteristic of a MENP is its ability to couple magnetic and electric polarizations, an emergent property that arises from its composite nature [27]. Understanding this coupling at a fundamental level is essential to appreciating and engineering its biomedical applications. This section explores the physics of the magnetoelectric effect in core-shell nanocomposites and reviews the materials science methods used to synthesize, functionalize, and characterize these advanced nanostructures [26].

2.1 The magnetoelectric effect in core-shell nanoparticles

The most widely studied and effective architecture for MENPs is a core-shell nanocomposite structure, which maximizes the interfacial area between two distinct ferroic phases [44]. This design facilitates a strain-mediated ME effect, a two-step energy conversion process that forms the basis of the nanoparticle’s function.

2.1.1 Fundamental principle: Strain-mediated coupling

The ME effect in these composites is not an intrinsic property of either the core or shell material alone but rather a product of their intimate mechanical coupling [45]. The process unfolds as follows:

Magnetostriction in the core: The core of the nanoparticle is composed of a magnetostrictive material, typically a hard ferrite like cobalt ferrite (CoFe₂O₄). Magnetostriction is the property of a magnetic material to change its shape or dimensions in response to an applied magnetic field (H). When the MENP is exposed to an external magnetic field, the magnetic domains within the core align, inducing a mechanical strain (deformation) in the core material [45].
Strain transfer at the interface: This physical strain is then transferred mechanically across the tightly coupled core-shell interface to the surrounding shell. The efficiency of this strain transfer is paramount to the overall strength of the ME effect.
Piezoelectricity in the shell: The shell is made of a piezoelectric material, such as the perovskite ceramic barium titanate (BaTiO₃). Piezoelectricity is the ability of a material to generate an electric charge in response to applied mechanical stress. As the shell is strained by the core, its crystalline lattice deforms, causing a separation of positive and negative charge centers. This results in the generation of an electric dipole moment, creating a net electric polarization (P) and a strong, localized electric field (E) at the nanoparticle’s surface [45].

This entire sequence constitutes the direct magnetoelectric effect, where a magnetic stimulus produces an electric response. The reciprocal process, known as the converse ME effect, also occurs. If the MENP is subjected to an external electric field, the piezoelectric shell will deform. This strain is transferred to the magnetostrictive core, altering its magnetic anisotropy and causing a change in its net magnetization (M) [45]. The direct effect is the foundation for most therapeutic applications, such as drug release and electroporation, while the converse effect is the basis for potential diagnostic and sensing applications [36, 46].

The functionality of the MENP is not merely the sum of its magnetic and piezoelectric parts; it is an emergent property that exists exclusively at the interface. The ME effect is fundamentally a process of strain transfer from the core to the shell [45]. Consequently, the quality of this core-shell interface is the single most critical determinant of the nanoparticle’s therapeutic potential. Factors such as mechanical mismatch, poor lattice matching, or chemical diffusion at the interface during synthesis can severely impede strain transfer, resulting in a weak ME effect and rendering the nanoparticle functionally useless for its intended purpose [26]. Synthesis strategies are therefore meticulously designed to enhance this mechanical coupling, and nanoparticle morphologies with a larger interfacial surface area, such as nanorods, have been shown to exhibit superior ME performance compared to spherical particles of similar volume [26]. This elevates the importance of synthesis and characterization from procedural steps to the central challenge in designing effective MENPs.

2.1.2 Quantification of the ME effect

The efficiency of this magnetic-to-electric energy conversion is quantified by the magnetoelectric coefficient (αME). In the dynamic mode, which is most relevant for biomedical applications involving alternating fields, the direct ME coefficient is defined as the change in the induced electric field (δE) per unit change in the applied magnetic field (δH). This coefficient is typically expressed in units of V/(cm · Oe) or mV/(cm · Oe). The magnitude of αME is a key figure of merit for a MENP, as it dictates the strength of the magnetic field required to elicit a desired biological effect. For CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ core-shell systems, experimental measurements have reported significant αME values at room temperature, with some studies showing values as high as 89 mV/(cm · Oe) [44]. Such a coefficient can generate local electric fields on the order of 1,000 V/cm under a strong DC bias, which is more than sufficient to interact with and manipulate biological structures like cell membranes [26].

3. Synthesis, functionalization, and characterization

The translation of the theoretical promise of MENPs into functional biomedical tools depends critically on the ability to synthesize them with precise control over their physical and chemical properties.

3.1 Synthesis routes

The creation of a high-quality core-shell MENP typically involves a multi-step wet-chemical process designed to first form the magnetic core and then grow the piezoelectric shell onto its surface (as illustrated by examples in Figure 2).

Figure 2.
Core-shell magnetoelectric nanoparticle (MENP) synthesis via sol-gel and hydrothermal methods. (a) Sol-gel fabrication of CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ (CFO@BTO) MENPs: CFO nanoparticles are dispersed in BTO sol containing Ba and Ti precursors, followed by 2-hour sonication and drying at 120°C to form CFO@BTO gel, then calcination at 780°C to create core-shell structured MENPs (reproduced with permission from [48]). (b) Hydrothermal synthesis pathway for core-shell MENPs: b-site ions are coated onto A-site ion cores through sequential coating, hydrothermal treatment, and annealing steps to achieve the final core-shell architecture. Reproduced with permission from [49].

Core synthesis: The magnetostrictive core (e.g., CoFe₂O₄) is often synthesized first using methods like co-precipitation or solvothermal/hydrothermal synthesis. In a typical co-precipitation route, aqueous solutions of metal salts (e.g., cobalt(II) nitrate and iron(III) nitrate) are mixed in stoichiometric ratios and precipitated by adding a strong base, such as sodium hydroxide, at elevated temperatures [47]. Solvothermal methods, which involve reactions in a sealed vessel at high temperature and pressure, can offer better control over crystallinity and size distribution [44].

Shell growth: Once the magnetic cores are formed and purified, the piezoelectric shell (e.g., BaTiO₃) is grown on their surface. The sol-gel method is commonly employed for this step. The magnetic cores are suspended in a solution containing the precursors for the shell, such as barium and titanium alkoxides. Through controlled hydrolysis and condensation reactions, a gel-like network of shell material forms and deposits onto the surface of the cores. A final annealing or calcination step at high temperature (e.g., 700°C) is often required to crystallize the shell into the desired perovskite phase [44].

Throughout the synthesis, precise control over parameters like precursor concentration, temperature, reaction time, and the use of capping agents (e.g., oleic acid, polyvinylpyrrolidone) is essential to dictate the final particle size, shape (spheres vs. rods), shell thickness, and monodispersity, all of which have a direct impact on the magnetic and magnetoelectric properties of the final product [26].

3.2 Surface functionalization

As synthesized MENPs are typically hydrophobic and prone to aggregation in physiological environments. To be used in biomedical applications and to keep them separate, their surface must be functionalized. This serves several critical purposes:

Biocompatibility and stability: Coating the MENPs with a hydrophilic and biocompatible polymer, most commonly polyethylene glycol (PEG), is essential. This “stealth” coating prevents opsonization (tagging by immune proteins) and subsequent clearance by the reticuloendothelial system (RES), thereby prolonging the nanoparticles’ circulation half-life in the bloodstream [50].

Drug conjugation: For drug delivery applications, the therapeutic payload must be attached to the nanoparticle’s surface. This is achieved by introducing functional groups, such as carboxyl and amine, onto the surface. These groups can form covalent or electrostatic bonds with drug molecules such as Paclitaxel (PTX) and Doxorubicin (DOX) [50]. The choice of linker chemistry is crucial, as it must be stable enough to prevent premature drug release but susceptible to cleavage by the ME-triggered release mechanism.

3.3 Characterization techniques

A suite of advanced analytical techniques is required to rigorously characterize the synthesized MENPs and validate that they possess the desired structure and functionality.

X-ray diffraction (XRD): This is the primary technique used to confirm the crystalline structure of the nanoparticles. The XRD patterns should show distinct peaks corresponding to both the spinel crystal phase of the ferrite core and the perovskite phase of the titanate shell, confirming the composite nature of the material [44].

Transmission electron microscopy (TEM/HRTEM): It provides direct visualization of the nanoparticles, allowing for the assessment of their size, shape, and size distribution. High-resolution TEM (HRTEM) is crucial for confirming the core-shell architecture, revealing the distinct lattice fringes of the core and shell materials, and verifying the integrity of the interface [44].

Vibrating sample magnetometry (VSM): It is used to measure the magnetic properties of the MENPs. It generates a magnetic hysteresis (M–H) loop, from which key parameters like saturation magnetization (Ms), remnant magnetization (Mr), and coercivity (Hc) can be determined. These parameters are essential for understanding the nanoparticles’ magnetic response and their potential for magnetic guidance and hyperthermia [44].

Magnetoelectric characterization: The most critical characterization is the direct measurement of the magnetoelectric coefficient. This is typically done by placing the nanoparticles in a sample holder, applying a known AC magnetic field, and measuring the resulting output voltage with a lock-in amplifier. This provides a quantitative measure of the nanoparticles’ core functionality as nano-transducers [44].

Through this combination of controlled synthesis, strategic functionalization, and rigorous characterization, researchers can engineer MENPs with tailored properties optimized for specific applications in precision oncology.

4. On-demand drug release: Field-controlled molecular actuation

Conventional drug therapies often fail to reach protected reservoirs in diseases like advanced cancers or neurotropic infections (e.g., HIV), necessitating highly targeted delivery systems. Magnetoelectric nanoparticles have emerged as versatile nanocarriers for this purpose, thanks to their intrinsic coupling of magnetic and electric properties. When an external low-frequency magnetic field is applied, MENPs generate localized electric fields without heating the tissue [51]. This allows wireless, on-demand triggering of drug release and even nano-scale electroporation of cell membranes. High saturation magnetization (Ms = 50–80 emu/g) enables efficient magnetic guidance to tumor sites under static field gradients, allowing nanoparticle accumulation at specific anatomical locations with minimal applied field strength [42, 51]. High magnetoelectric coefficient (αME) values (>80 mV/cm · Oe) are sufficient to generate localized electric fields exceeding 100 V/cm to trigger electroporation and disrupt drug-MENP bonds without bulk tissue heating [43, 52]. Additionally, low magnetic anisotropy (Ku = 0.5–5 kJ/m³) and low coercivity (Hc < 5 mT) are essential to maintain superparamagnetic behavior at physiological temperature and to prevent particle aggregation during circulation while enabling rapid response to alternating fields [42]. Further, the particle size of 20–100 nm balances superparamagnetic properties with sufficient surface area for drug loading (5%–20% w/w), while narrow size distributions ensure uniform release kinetics across the nanoparticle population [42, 53]. Operating protocols typically employ two-stage magnetic actuation: static DC fields (0.1–1 Tesla) for directional guidance and tumor retention, followed by low-frequency AC fields (50–100 Hz, 44–100 Oe) to trigger localized electric field generation and controlled release at the tumor interface [43, 54]. This dual-field approach, illustrated schematically in Figure 3, exploits the differential electroporation thresholds between cancer and normal cells, with tumor cell membranes disrupted at significantly lower field strengths than healthy tissue [51, 52].

Figure 3.
(i) Reversible drug loading and release control using magnetoelectric nanoparticles. The magnetoelectric effect creates controllable surface electric dipoles on MENGs under applied magnetic fields. When subjected to a magnetic field (HDC = 100 Oe), drug molecules (DOX) form ionic bonds with charged sites on the nanoparticles surface, enabling controlled drug loading. Field reversal (HDC = − 100 Oe) inverts the surface polarity and triggers directional breaking of ionic bonds, resulting in controlled drug release (reprinted with permission from [56]). (ii) Hypothesis illustration: magnetoelectric nanoparticles can function as externally field-controlled nano-electroporation sites, transiently disrupting cancer cell membranes to facilitate targeted drug entry (reprinted with permission from [42]).

For instance, drugs bound to MENPs stay securely attached during circulation and deliver upon applying an alternating magnetic field. This was demonstrated by Nair et al., who released the antiretroviral AZT-triphosphate from CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ MENPs using a low-intensity AC field [55]. Cancer cells and neurons exhibit high electrical polarizability, allowing MENPs to utilize variations in membrane properties for targeted delivery. In a study comparing ovarian cancer cells (SKOV-3) to healthy ovarian epithelial cells, researchers demonstrated that MENPs loaded with the chemotherapy drug paclitaxel were able to penetrate only the tumor cells when subjected to a 30-Oe direct current (DC) field. This targeted treatment effectively eradicated the cancer cells within 24 hours while leaving the normal cells unharmed [42]. This strategy (as shown in Figure 3) is based on the observation that tumor cell membranes can be electroporated with a lower electric field threshold compared to normal cells. Magnetic-engineered nanoparticles convert an applied magnetic stimulus into a strong localized electric field, creating “nanoelectroporation” pores mainly in the membranes of cancer cells [42].

Follow-up work in mice confirmed this high specificity: only mice treated weekly with paclitaxel-MENPs under a magnetic field were completely tumor-free after three months, whereas control groups (free drug, polymer carriers, or no field) showed ongoing tumor growth [43]. In these models, MENPs effectively utilized the electrical thresholds of membranes. Cancer cells were electroporated and absorbed the drug at much lower field strengths than healthy cells, thereby sparing normal tissues [43].

Beyond ovarian cancer, MENP carriers have been explored for other tumors. Mushtaq and coworkers reported that magnetoelectric core-shell nanorods (CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃) loaded with doxorubicin (DOX) and methotrexate (MTX) could be remotely triggered to release nearly 98% of their drug payload in 20 minutes under a 4 mT field [55]. These DOX/MENP systems demonstrated a strong dose-dependent cytotoxic effect against HepG2 liver cancer cells and HT144 melanoma cells in vitro [55]. Importantly, the application of a magnetic field also inhibited the cells’ multidrug-resistance (MDR) pump activity, thereby enhancing intracellular drug retention [55, 57]. The MENP platform consistently enabled greater drug accumulation in cancer cells and more effective killing compared to passive delivery. In another example, MENPs were used to deliver peptide drugs to brain tumors: 30-nm CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ MENPs were chemically conjugated to a growth hormone-releasing hormone antagonist (MIA690) and applied to human glioblastoma U-87 MG cells. Under a DC field, the peptide–MENP complexes selectively bound to glioblastoma cells, and then an AC field released the peptide inside the cells. The study concluded that MENPs serve as an effective carrier for targeted glioblastoma therapy [58–60]. These studies underscore that MENPs can carry a wide range of anti-cancer agents, such as chemotherapies, drugs, and peptides, and achieve controlled, field-triggered release at tumor sites (even across the blood-brain barrier (BBB)), often with complete tumor regression in experimental models [61].

Magnetoelectric nanoparticles are also being investigated as a means to address the challenges of delivering treatments for viral diseases. A major obstacle in HIV/AIDS therapy is the persistent viral reservoirs in the brain, protected by the BBB. Nair et al. demonstrated that CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ MENPs could ferry the activated antiviral AZT-triphosphate (AZT-TP) across an in vitro BBB model and then release it on demand under an AC magnetic field. MENPs carrying AZT-TP were transported through the BBB model using a static field gradient. Once at the target, a 100 Hz AC field triggered the rapid release of the drug. This remote control of conjugation strength (strong binding during transit, then AC-triggered release) ensured that the drug was only liberated at the intended site. Magneto-electroporation nanoparticles have also been combined with advanced gene-editing tools to enhance their effectiveness. Kaushik et al. connected CRISPR-Cas9/guide-RNA complexes to MENPs and employed a ~ 60 Oe AC field to deliver the gene-editing machinery into HIV-infected microglial cells. The field-triggered release enabled the uptake of Cas9/gRNA, leading to a significant reduction in latent HIV-1 expression within brain reservoir cells [62]. The key advantage is that MENPs noninvasively bridge magnetic guidance and electric-field driven release, enabling targeted “block-and-kill” strategies against hidden HIV. Indeed, a recent review highlights that MENP systems can deliver not only antiretroviral drugs but also antibiotics across the BBB to treat both HIV and tuberculosis in the CNS, pointing to broader utility in neuroinfectious diseases [32, 62, 63].

The same MENP approach could address drug delivery in neurological tuberculosis. CNS TB is notoriously difficult to treat because first-line anti-TB drugs penetrate the brain poorly. By inducing local electroporation of BBB endothelial cells, MENPs could transiently open the barrier and carry antibiotics into the brain parenchyma [32]. A recent Pharmaceutics review specifically noted the promise of MENP-mediated delivery of antitubercular agents to CNS infection sites. Although experimental data are still emerging, these authors conclude that MENPs offer a promising platform for enhancing CNS drug levels in TB and HIV meningitis [32].

In summary, multiple published studies have shown (summarized in Table 1) that MENPs can be loaded with chemotherapeutics, antivirals, genes, or other therapeutic agents and then remotely activated by weak magnetic fields to achieve highly targeted release. By exploiting the electric polarization of cell membranes, MENPs have enabled cancer cell-specific electroporation and drug uptake. They have also been shown to deliver antiretrovirals and gene-editing enzymes to HIV reservoirs across the BBB. Early reports indicate significant increases in drug efficacy. For example, paclitaxel-MENPs effectively treated tumor-bearing mice when the free drug failed and demonstrated the ability to penetrate normally impermeable barriers without causing toxicity. All these findings indicate MENPs are a breakthrough “on-demand” drug carrier for difficult-to-treat diseases ranging from ovarian and brain cancer to HIV/AIDS and CNS infections.

Title	MENP system	Application focus	Model	Key contribution & findings	Ref (s)
Remotely Controlled Surface Charge Modulation of Magnetoelectric Nanogenerators	CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ core–shell (MENG)	Magnetically assisted on-demand DOX loading/release	In vitro (MCF-7 cells)	Demonstrated swift, reversible DOX loading/release under unidirectional/rotating DC fields (±100 Oe). Achieved enhanced cancer-cell killing via directional ionic-bond control.	[81]
Foundational insights for theranostic applications of magnetoelectric nanoparticles	Review of Biomedical Applications of MENPs	Wireless non-surgical neuromodulation, cancer therapy, drug delivery, diagnostics.	In silico, in vitro, ex vivo, in vivo (various).	Analyzed ME physics for two-way wireless biointerfaces. Identified challenges and engineering solutions for MENP-based biomedical applications.	[36]
Externally controlled, on-demand release of anti-HIV drugs using magnetoelectric nanoparticles as carriers.	CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ core–shell (30 nm MENs)	Field-triggered AZTTP release and BBB translocation	In vitro spectrophotometry, AFM/FTIR, HIV-infected PBMCs, in vitro BBB model.	Demonstrated 89.3% AZTTP release at 44 Oe/1 kHz a.c. field versus 16.4% at 44 Oe d.c. field; reversible, non-thermal bond-specific release; preserved drug structure and antiviral efficacy; no cytotoxicity at < 50 µg/mL; enabled ~ 40% translocation across in vitro BBB model.	[51]
Field-controlled magnetoelectric core-shell CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ nanoparticles as effective drug carriers and for drug release in vitro.	CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ core–shell	MF-controlled DOX/MTX delivery and release	In vitro (HepG2, HT144)	Synthesized MF-stable NRs; coated with GMO for − 55 mV ZP. Achieved 98% DOX/MTX release under 5 mT a.c. field in 20 min. MF + NRs delivered cytotoxicity via apoptosis; minimal hemolysis at IC₅₀ concentration.	[82]
Magnetoelectric core–shell CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ nanorods: their role in drug delivery and effect on multidrug resistance pump activity in vitro	CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ nanorods	MF-triggered DOX/MTX delivery and MDR inhibition	In vitro (HepG2, HT144)	Sonochemically synthesized NRs (78 × 30 nm) achieved 98% drug release under a 4 mT a.c. field. MF + NRs enhanced cytotoxicity versus free drug, induced ROS, apoptosis, cell-cycle arrest, DNA damage, and inhibited MDR pump activity.	[55]
Targeted and controlled anticancer drug delivery and release with magnetoelectric nanoparticles.	CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ core–shell (MENs)	Field-controlled high-specificity PTX delivery/release	In vitro (AFM/MFM, lysate), in vivo (SKOV-3 xenografts).	Demonstrated two-step field-control: 100 Oe d.c. field for MEN penetration into tumor cells; 50 Oe 100 Hz a.c. field for on-demand PTX release. Weekly IV MEN/PTX + MF cured tumors in nude mice.	[43]

Table 1.

Comparative overview of MENP-mediated studies in precision oncology.

5. Remote-triggered hyperthermia: From magnetic heating to multimodal thermal effects

Magnetic hyperthermia is a well-established therapeutic modality that leverages the heat-generating capacity of magnetic nanoparticles when an external alternating magnetic field (AMF) is applied. This method offers a targeted strategy for the thermal ablation of tumors [64]. Thus, MENPs can serve as effective magnetic hyperthermia agents, but their complex composite structure gives rise to additional thermal phenomena that extend beyond conventional magnetic heating mechanisms. This section explores both the primary magnetic heating mechanisms as well as the emerging ME-mediated thermal mechanisms that potentially establish MENPs as multimodal therapeutic agents.

5.1 Primary heating mechanisms in MENPs

The primary heat generation in MENPs occurs when they are subjected to a high-frequency AMF (in the range of 100–500 kHz). The magnetic core of the MENPs functions like conventional magnetic nanoparticles by absorbing energy from the external AMF through the magnetic moments of the nanoparticles [65]. This absorbed energy is subsequently dissipated in the form of heat into the surrounding environment through various physical relaxation mechanisms. For single-domain nanoparticles, heat is primarily generated through the following two mechanisms:

Néel relaxation: It is an internal process where the magnetic moment of the nanoparticle (which is fixed relative to the crystal lattice) flips its orientation to align with the external field. This rotation occurs against the material’s intrinsic magneto crystalline anisotropy energy barrier, and as such, the energy that is lost in overcoming this barrier during each cycle of the AMF is dissipated as heat. This mechanism is particularly dominant for smaller nanoparticles that are either immobilized or are in a highly viscous environment [66].
Brownian relaxation: This involves the physical rotation of the entire nanoparticle within a fluid medium. When the nanoparticle, with its fixed magnetic moment, attempts to align with the oscillating external field, heat is generated due to the friction between the rotating particle and its viscous surrounding medium. This mechanism is dominant for larger nanoparticles suspended in a low-viscosity fluid [67].

Effective relaxation time is determined by the speed of these two parallel processes. Additionally, for larger magnetic particles that are either ferromagnetic or contain multiple domains, an additional mechanism called hysteresis loss becomes significant. In hysteresis loss, the energy dissipated as heat in each AMF cycle is proportional to the area of the material’s magnetic hysteresis loop [68]. Thus, the relative contribution of these three mechanisms depends on multiple factors, including the nanoparticle’s size, shape, composition (which determines its magnetic anisotropy and saturation magnetization), and the properties of the surrounding biological medium [67].

Magneto pyroelectric and phonon-mediated effects: The magneto pyroelectric effect describes a process where the heat generated by the magnetic core through magnetic hyperthermia induces a pyroelectric response in the shell. Pyroelectric materials generate a voltage in response to a change in temperature. This represents another heat-mediated energy conversion pathway that potentially contributes to the complex interplay of fields and thermal energy within the MENPs [69].

Furthermore, the role of phonons (quantized lattice vibrations) must also be considered. The ME effect is fundamentally strained. So, when an MENP is subjected to a high-frequency AMF for hyperthermia, its magnetostrictive core undergoes rapid mechanical oscillations. This forces the piezoelectric shell into a state of intense, high-frequency mechanical strain. The dissipation of this mechanical energy within the crystal lattice can manifest directly as heat through phonon-mediated processes. This “piezo-phononic” heating thus represents a direct, non-magnetic source of thermal energy originating from the shell itself, contributing to the overall temperature increase [70].

Magnetic property requirements for hyperthermia applications: Effective MENP-mediated hyperthermia requires magnetic parameters optimized to maximize specific absorption rate (SAR) and thermal dissipation within clinically safe AMF constraints (Figure 4). High saturation magnetization (Ms = 65–85 emu/g) is essential to minimize the nanoparticle concentration required to achieve therapeutic temperatures (42–46°C), with cobalt ferrite systems typically achieving 65–70 emu/g compared to 80–85 emu/g for iron oxide [71, 72]. Critically, high magnetic anisotropy (Ku > 5 kJ/m³) maximizes hysteresis losses and promotes Néel relaxation by increasing the energy barrier for magnetic moment reversal, making cobalt ferrite (Ku ~ 3.5–15 kJ/m³) superior to iron oxide (Ku ~ 0.1 kJ/m³) for hyperthermia applications [72, 73]. Single-domain particles in the 10–30 nm size range exhibit optimal SAR values (400–500 W/g at clinical field strengths of 8.5 kA/m) by maximizing magnetic moments while avoiding multi-domain formation that reduces heating efficiency [71, 74]. Moderate to high coercivity (Hc = 200–500 Oe) and remanent magnetization (Mr = 10–30 emu/g) contribute significantly to hysteresis losses above the blocking temperature during treatment, with ferromagnetic or ferrimagnetic behavior preferred over superparamagnetic response [73]. The Curie temperature (TC) must remain well above therapeutic temperatures (TC ≫ 46°C) to maintain magnetic properties throughout treatment, while operating frequencies of 100–500 kHz must respect the Brezovich criterion (H · f ≤ 4.85 × 10⁸ A · m⁻¹ · s⁻¹) to prevent eddy current heating in healthy tissues [74, 75]. In addition, the magnetostrictive core’s mechanical oscillations under high-frequency AMF induce strain in the piezoelectric shell, contributing additional phonon-mediated heating pathways beyond conventional magnetic mechanisms and potentially enhancing overall thermal efficiency [76, 77].

Figure 4.
Magnetic field-guided thermal generation in CoFe/BaTi magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Three-dimensional simulations show the electric potential distribution (top row), the electric field distribution in the surrounding extracellular medium (middle row), and the localized temperature increase (bottom row) when external magnetic fields of increasing strength are applied along the z-axis. The magnetic field intensity progressively increases from 50 mT to 300 mT, approaching the magnetic saturation of the core, demonstrating the magnetoelectric effect-mediated conversion of magnetic energy to electrical and thermal energy (reprinted with permission from [78]).

5.2 Case studies in magnetoelectric nanoparticle-mediated hyperthermia

Magnetoelectric nanoparticles provide a unique opportunity for localized thermal therapy in precision oncology by utilizing both magnetic and electric-field–mediated heating pathways. Although dedicated experimental reports are limited, emerging computational and materials research show MENP architectures capable of delivering focused hyperthermia while reducing off-target effects [27, 79, 80].

A finite-element feasibility study modeled cobalt ferrite-barium titanate (CFO-BTO) core-shell MENPs as intratumoral heat sources under clinically safe alternating magnetic fields. By coupling the magnetostrictive CFO core to the piezoelectric BTO shell, the simulation mapped spatiotemporal temperature profiles that reached the therapeutic window (42–46°C) within targeted volumes without elevating bulk tissue temperatures. This work established design rules for nanoparticle loading, placement, and magnetic-field parameters to achieve precise thermal dosing in silico [80].

Investigations of BiFeO₃ (BFO)-based MENPs embedded in smart hydrogel matrices highlighted the synergy of magnetoelectric responsiveness and matrix confinement for cancer therapy. Externally applied AC fields induced localized heating via magnetostrictive strain transfer and electric-field dissipation, while the hydrogel scaffold enabled controlled nanoparticle localization and minimal systemic heating. These findings underscore the potential to integrate hyperthermia with on-demand drug release and real-time monitoring within a single biocompatible composite [79].

While magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia is well-established, direct experimental validation of magnetoelectric coupling effects in hyperthermia applications remains limited. The available literature focuses primarily on pure magnetic heating mechanisms rather than the strain-mediated or electric field-induced heating pathways that would distinguish MENP systems from conventional magnetic hyperthermia agents. Current SAR measurements and heating efficiency studies provide valuable baselines, but dedicated investigations of magnetoelectric-specific thermal generation mechanisms are needed to fully validate MENP hyperthermia applications.

6. Future challenges

Beyond the established applications in cancer therapeutics, MENPs have emerged as a promising focus in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, offering significant potential to develop next-generation intelligent biomaterials. While this chapter has focused extensively on remote-triggered hyperthermia and on-demand drug release for precision oncology, the underlying principles of ME-mediated therapeutic control extend to broader biomedical applications. However, realizing the full clinical potential of MENP-based hyperthermia and drug delivery systems for cancer treatment requires addressing multiple critical barriers spanning material development, safety management, regulatory compliance, and manufacturing scalability.

Translating MENP-based cancer therapeutics from laboratory settings to clinical practice faces several interconnected challenges. The primary acute safety concern involves off-target eddy current heating from applied alternating magnetic fields, which must be controlled to prevent excessive thermal damage to healthy tissues surrounding tumor sites. While intermittent field application can reduce collateral heating, real-time invasive thermometry remains essential for treatment monitoring and temperature control during hyperthermia. Chronic toxicity concerns center on long-term nanoparticle accumulation in reticuloendothelial organs, with persistent hepatic and renal deposition documented at 120 days post-administration, potentially leading to organ dysfunction. Comprehensive clinical protocols encompassing particle design optimization for biodegradability, stringent field parameter control with real-time monitoring, baseline and longitudinal hepatic and renal function assessment, and cumulative dose-limiting strategies will be essential for managing these safety concerns across repeated treatment cycles in cancer patients.

From a materials perspective, achieving optimal magnetic properties for both hyperthermia and drug release while maintaining biocompatibility remains challenging. While cobalt ferrite (CoFe₂O₄) remains the preferred magnetostrictive phase due to its superior magnetic anisotropy and saturation magnetization, enabling high specific absorption rates, cobalt cytotoxicity has prompted growing interest in biocompatible ferrite alternatives such as magnetite (Fe₃O₄) or manganese ferrite (MnFe₂O₄). Notably, Fe₃O₄ nanoparticles are the only oxide nanomaterial currently approved by the U.S. FDA for clinical applications, establishing a regulatory precedent that could potentially accelerate approval pathways for novel MENP formulations.

Manufacturing scalability and reproducibility present additional barriers to the clinical translation of MENP-based cancer therapies. Current MENP synthesis relies on wet-chemical protocols involving co-precipitation, solvothermal synthesis, and sol-gel deposition methods that are inherently difficult to scale while maintaining tight control over particle size, morphology, crystal quality, and magnetoelectric coupling efficiency. Batch-to-batch variability in core-shell interface quality directly impacts the magnetoelectric coefficient and, thus, overall therapeutic efficacy for both hyperthermia and drug release applications, necessitating the development of robust, high-throughput fabrication methods compatible with good manufacturing practices (GMP) standards for clinical production. Integration of MENP-based cancer therapies into existing clinical oncology workflows will also require the development of standardized protocols for patient selection, treatment planning, field parameter optimization for individual tumors, real-time efficacy monitoring, and post-treatment surveillance for delayed adverse effects.

Overcoming these multifaceted challenges will unlock the extraordinary potential of magnetoelectric nanoparticles as transformative agents for precision oncology. By combining rigorous safety validation tailored to cancer applications, innovative material engineering that balances magnetic performance with biocompatibility, scalable manufacturing solutions that maintain MENP quality and efficacy, and evidence-based clinical protocols that optimize hyperthermia dosing and drug release kinetics, MENPs could enable a new era of personalized cancer therapy. This approach would be characterized by enhanced specificity for cancer cells, reduced systemic toxicity compared to conventional chemotherapy, and seamless real-time integration of diagnosis with therapeutic delivery. The convergence of advances in nanotechnology, magnetic field engineering, oncology, and precision medicine provides a compelling roadmap toward realizing this transformative vision for next-generation cancer treatment.

7. Conclusion

Magnetoelectric nanoparticles stand at the frontier of nanomedicine, with the potential to redefine how we diagnose, monitor, and treat complex diseases such as cancer. By harnessing the magnetoelectric effect, MENPs act as wireless, programmable nano-transducers, enabling on-demand drug release, externally triggered hyperthermia, and seamless theragnostic integration of therapy with real-time diagnostic feedback. These capabilities point toward a future of cancer therapy that is personalized, precise, and minimally invasive. In parallel, advances in MENPs demonstrate how surface modifications with silica, gold, or biocompatible polymers such as PEG and dextran greatly improve stability, minimize aggregation, and enhance their ability to bypass biological barriers. This not only enhances biocompatibility and cellular uptake but also maximizes therapeutic precision, making multifunctional MENPs versatile tools in both early-stage and advanced disease management. Despite these advances, the translation of MENPs from experimental systems to clinical practice faces substantial hurdles. Key challenges include ensuring long-term biocompatibility and safety, achieving scalable and reproducible synthesis methods, navigating regulatory pathways (particularly FDA approval for novel nanomaterials), and integrating nanoparticle-based therapies into existing clinical protocols. Addressing these complexities will demand cross-disciplinary collaboration, bridging nanotechnology, oncology, materials science, bioengineering, and clinical medicine.

Ultimately, MENPs represent multifunctional and adaptive platforms that could lead to a new era of precision oncology and regenerative medicine. Their ability to synergize diagnosis with therapy, respond dynamically to external stimuli, and operate at the cellular and molecular scale makes them uniquely positioned to deliver on the promise of next-generation theranostics. While significant challenges remain, the convergence of innovative nanomaterials, advanced imaging, and targeted therapies provides a compelling roadmap toward more effective, safer, and personalized treatment paradigms.

Acknowledgments

Figure 1 was created using BioRender.com. S.Y. and M.S. would like to thank Ishaq Khan for his valuable comments during the preparation of this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Shi J, Kantoff PW, Wooster R, Farokhzad OC. Cancer nanomedicine: Progress, challenges and opportunities. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2017;17:20–37.
2. van der Meel R, et al. Smart cancer nanomedicine. Nature Nanotechnology. 2019;14:1007–1017.
3. Bhatia SN, Chen X, Dobrovolskaia MA, Lammers T. Cancer nanomedicine. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2022;22:550–556.
4. Mendes BB, et al. Nanodelivery of nucleic acids. Nature Reviews Methods Primers. 2022;2:24.
5. Wang B, et al. Current advance of nanotechnology in diagnosis and treatment for malignant tumors. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. 2024;9:200.
6. Mitragotri S, et al. Accelerating the translation of nanomaterials in biomedicine. ACS Nano. 2015;9:6644–6654.
7. Kim ST, Saha K, Kim C, Rotello VM. The role of surface functionality in determining nanoparticle cytotoxicity. Accounts of Chemical Research. 2013;46:681–691.
8. Canal C, Aparicio RM, Vilchez A, Esquena J, García-Celma MJ. Drug delivery properties of macroporous polystyrene solid foams. Journal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2012;15:197–207.
9. Silvera Batista CA, Larson RG, Kotov NA. Nonadditivity of nanoparticle interactions. Science. 2015;350:1242477.
10. Altammar KA. A review on nanoparticles: Characteristics, synthesis, applications, and challenges. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2023;14:1155622.
11. Naim A, Khan MI, Khan MF, Balqis SN, Kumar A. Navigating the Tightrope: Ethical challenges and standards in medical accreditation. Global Perspectives on Quality Management and Accreditation in Higher Education. 2025;169–186.
12. Yusuf A, Almotairy ARZ, Henidi H, Alshehri OY, Aldughaim MS. Nanoparticles as drug delivery systems: A review of the implication of nanoparticles’ physicochemical properties on responses in biological systems. Polymers. 2023;15:1596.
13. Liu JF, Jang B, Issadore D, Tsourkas A. Use of magnetic fields and nanoparticles to trigger drug release and improve tumor targeting. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology. 2019;11:e1571.
14. Li W, Liu Y, Qian Z, Yang Y. Evaluation of tumor treatment of magnetic nanoparticles driven by extremely low frequency magnetic field. Scientific Reports. 2017;7:46287.
15. Kumar CS, Mohammad F. Magnetic nanomaterials for hyperthermia-based therapy and controlled drug delivery. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 2011;63:789–808.
16. Price PM, Mahmoud WE, Al-Ghamdi AA, Bronstein LM. Magnetic drug delivery: Where the field is going. Frontiers in Chemistry. 2018;6:619.
17. Eguchi H, et al. A ferromagnetic compound with anti-cancer proeprties for controlled drug delivery and imaging. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:9194.
18. Sato I, et al. Simultaneous hyperthermia-chemotherapy with controlled drug delivery using single-drug nanoparticles. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:24629.
19. Nwabunwanne C, et al. Magnetic nanoparticles: Biosynthesis, characterization, surface functionalization and biomedical applications. Journal of the Indian Chemical Society. 2025;102(3):101617.
20. Yang HY, Li Y, Lee DS. Functionalization of magnetic nanoparticles with organic ligands toward biomedical applications. Advanced NanoBiomed Research. 2021;1:2000043.
21. Chand K, Vasquez‐Guardado ES. Magnetic nanoparticles: Synthesis and applications in life sciences. ChemistryOpen. 2025;14(12):e202500214.
22. Xing Z-C, Chang Y, Kang I-K. Immobilization of biomolecules on the surface of inorganic nanoparticles for biomedical applications. Science and Technology of Advanced Materials. 2010;11:014101.
23. Paul NL, Carpa R, Ionescu RE, Popa CO. The biomedical limitations of magnetic nanoparticles and a biocompatible alternative in the form of magnetotactic bacteria. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2025;16:231.
24. Jain TK, Reddy MK, Morales MA, Leslie-Pelecky DL, Labhasetwar V. Biodistribution, clearance, and biocompatibility of iron oxide magnetic nanoparticles in rats. Molecular Pharmaceutics. 2008;5:316–327.
25. Kolishetti N, et al. Recent advances, status, and opportunities of magneto-electric nanocarriers for biomedical applications. Molecular Aspects of Medicine. 2022;83:101046.
26. Fiocchi S, et al. Modeling of core-shell magneto-electric nanoparticles for biomedical applications: Effect of composition, dimension, and magnetic field features on magnetoelectric response. PloS One. 2022;17:e0274676.
27. Marrella A, et al. Magnetoelectric nanoparticles shape modulates their electrical output. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. 2023;11:1219777.
28. Ramezani Z, André V, Khizroev S. Modeling the effect of magnetoelectric nanoparticles on neuronal electrical activity: An analog circuit approach. Biointerphases. 2024;19:031001.
29. Shotbolt M, Bryant J, Liang P, Khizroev S. Mechanism and applications of magnetoelectric nanoparticles in cancer therapy. Nanomedicine. 2025;1–13.
30. Hadouch Y, et al. Current advances in magnetoelectric composites with various interphase connectivity types. Sustainable Energy & Fuels. 2025; 9:1957–1992.
31. Stimphil E, et al. Physics considerations in targeted anticancer drug delivery by magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Applied Physics Reviews. 2017;4:021101.
32. Mhambi S, Fisher D, Tchokonte MBT, Dube A. Permeation challenges of drugs for treatment of neurological tuberculosis and hiv and the application of magneto-electric nanoparticle drug delivery systems. Pharmaceutics. 2021;13:1479.
33. Xiong L, Liang B, Yu K. Magnetic hyperthermia in oncology: Nanomaterials-driven combinatorial strategies for synergistic therapeutic gains. Materials Today Bio. 2025. p. 102070.
34. Fernandes S, et al. Magnetic nanoparticle-based hyperthermia mediates drug delivery and impairs the tumorigenic capacity of quiescent colorectal cancer stem cells. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 2021;13:15959–15972.
35. Vezzoni A, et al. Computational insights into magnetoelectric nanoparticles for neural stimulation. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 2025;19:1583152.
36. Andre V, et al. Foundational insights for theranostic applications of magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Nanoscale Horizons. 2025;10:699–718.
37. Zhang E, et al. Magnetic-field-synchronized wireless modulation of neural activity by magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Brain Stimulation. 2022;15:1451–1462.
38. Lin J, Yu Y, Shigdar S, Fang DZ, Du JR, Wei MQ, … Duan W. Enhanced antitumor efficacy and reduced systemic toxicity of sulfatide-containing nanoliposomal doxorubicin in a xenograft model of colorectal cancer. PLOS ONE. 2012;7:e49277.
39. Khanna L, Prasad SR, Yedururi S, Parameswaran AM, Marcal LP, Sandrasegaran K, Katabathina VS. Second malignancies after radiation therapy: update on pathogenesis and cross-sectional imaging findings. Radiographics. 2021;41:876–894.
40. Gunaydin G, Gedik ME, Ayan S. Photodynamic therapy for the treatment and diagnosis of cancer-a review of the current clinical status. Frontiers in Chemistry. 2021;9:686303.
41. Zhang YF, Lu M. Advances in magnetic induction hyperthermia. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. 2024;12:1432189.
42. Guduru R, Liang P, Runowicz C, Nair M, Atluri V, Khizroev S. Magneto-electric nanoparticles to enable field-controlled high-specificity drug delivery to eradicate ovarian cancer cells. Scientific Reports. 2013;3:2953.
43. Rodzinski A, Guduru R, Liang P, Hadjikhani A, Stewart T, Stimphil E, … Khizroev S. Targeted and controlled anticancer drug delivery and release with magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:20867.
44. Nizamov TR, et al. Synthesis and functional characterization ofCoxFe3− xO₄-BaTiO₃ magnetoelectric nanocomposites for biomedical applications. Nanomaterials. 2023;13:811.
45. Kopyl S, Surmenev R, Surmeneva M, Fetisov Y, Kholkin A. Magnetoelectric effect: Principles and applications in biology and medicine– A review. Materials Today Bio. 2021;12:100149.
46. Tommasini A, et al. Exploring magnetoelectric nanoparticles for advanced nano-electroporation and drug delivery in interventional cardiology. Nanoscale Advances. 2025;7:5978–5992.
47. Corral-Flores V, Bueno-Baques D, Ziolo RD. Synthesis and characterization of novel CoFe₂O₄–BaTiO₃ multiferroic core–shell-type nanostructures. Acta Materialia. 2010;58:764–769.
48. Song H, et al. Multi-target cell therapy using a magnetoelectric microscale biorobot for targeted delivery and selective differentiation of SH-SY5Y cells via magnetically driven cell stamping. Materials Horizons. 2022;9:3031–3038.
49. Song H, Listyawan MA, Ryu. Core–shell magnetoelectric nanoparticles: Materials, synthesis, magnetoelectricity, and applications. Actuators. 2022;11:380.
50. Rodzinski A, et al. A novel mechanism for field-controlled high-specificity targeted anticancer drug delivery and on-demand release using magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Cancer Research. 2016;76:B47–B47.
51. Nair M, et al. Externally controlled on-demand release of anti-HIV drug using magneto-electric nanoparticles as carriers. Nature Communications. 2013;4:1707.
52. Mushtaq S, Shahzad K, Rizwan M, Ul-Hamid A, Abbasi BH. Magnetoelectric core–shell CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ nanorods: Their role in drug delivery and effect on multidrug resistance pump activity in vitro. RSC Advances. 2022;12:24958–24979.
53. Stewart TS, Nagesetti A, Guduru R, Liang P, Stimphil E, Hadjikhani A, … Khizroev S. Magnetoelectric nanoparticles for delivery of antitumor peptides into glioblastoma cells by magnetic fields. Nanomedicine. 2018;13:423–438.
54. Huang R, Li W, Lv X, Lei Z, Bian Y, Deng H, … Li X. BBB-penetrating magnetoelectric nanoparticles with sustainable Gel formulation for enhanced chemotherapy and reduced postoperative glioma recurrence. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2024;496:154208.
55. Mushtaq S, et al. Magnetoelectric core–shell CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ nanorods: Their role in drug delivery and effect on multidrug resistance pump activity in vitro. RSC Advances. 2022;12:24958–24979.
56. Murali N, Rainu SK, Sharma A, Siddhanta S, Singh N, Betal S. Remotely controlled surface charge modulation of magnetoelectric nanogenerators for swift and efficient drug delivery. ACS Omega. 2024;9:28937–28950.
57. Martinelli C, Biglietti M. Nanotechnological approaches for counteracting multidrug resistance in cancer. Cancer Drug Resistance. 2020;3:1003.
58. Stewart TS, et al. Magnetoelectric nanoparticles for delivery of antitumor peptides into glioblastoma cells by magnetic fields. Nanomedicine. 2018;13:423–438.
59. Huang R, et al. BBB-penetrating magnetoelectric nanoparticles with sustainable Gel formulation for enhanced chemotherapy and reduced postoperative glioma recurrence. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2024;496:154208.
60. Stewart T, et al. Magnetoelectric particles cross blood brain barrier to deliver anti-tumor peptide to glioblastoma cells with on-demand release. Cancer Research. 2016;76:1346–1346.
61. Tang L, Feng Y, Gao S, Mu Q, Liu C. Nanotherapeutics overcoming the blood-brain barrier for glioblastoma treatment. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2021;12:786700.
62. Kaushik A, et al. Magnetically guided non-invasive CRISPR-Cas9/gRNA delivery across blood-brain barrier to eradicate latent HIV-1 infection. Scientific Reports. 2019;9:3928.
63. Andre M, et al. Magnetoelectric extracellular vesicle latency-targeting (MELT) nanotherapeutic for the block-lock-and-kill HIV eradication strategy. Biomedicines. 2025;13:147.
64. Hedayatnasab Z, Abnisa F, Daud WMAW. Review on magnetic nanoparticles for magnetic nanofluid hyperthermia application. Materials & Design. 2017;123:174–196.
65. Liu X, et al. Comprehensive understanding of magnetic hyperthermia for improving antitumor therapeutic efficacy. Theranostics. 2020;10:3793.
66. Barrera G, Allia P, Tiberto P. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia enhanced by a rotating field. Physical Review Applied. 2024;21:064037.
67. Kwizera EA, Stewart S, Mahmud MM, He X. Magnetic nanoparticle-mediated heating for biomedical applications. Journal of Heat Transfer. 2022;144:030801.
68. Giustini AJ, et al. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia in cancer treatment. Nano Life. 2010;1:17–32.
69. Llacer-Wintle J, et al. The magnetopyroelectric effect: Heat-mediated magnetoelectricity in magnetic nanoparticle-ferroelectric polymer composites. Materials Horizons. 2023;10:2627–2637.
70. Apostolov AT, Apostolova IN, Wesselinowa JM. Multiferroic and phonon properties of the double perovskite Pr2FeAlO6. Materials. 2024;17:4785.
71. Liu X, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Zhu W, Li G, Ma X, … Liang XJ. Comprehensive understanding of magnetic hyperthermia for improving antitumor therapeutic efficacy. Theranostics. 2020;10:3793.
72. Giustini AJ, Petryk AA, Cassim SM, Tate JA, Baker IAN, Hoopes PJ. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia in cancer treatment. Nano Life. 2010;1:17–32.
73. Barrera G, Allia P, Tiberto P. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia enhanced by a rotating field. Physical Review Applied. 2024;21:064037.
74. Kwizera EA, Stewart S, Mahmud MM, He X. Magnetic nanoparticle-mediated heating for biomedical applications. Journal of Heat Transfer. 2022;144:030801.
75. Herrero de la Parte B, Rodrigo I, Gutiérrez-Basoa J, Iturrizaga Correcher S, Mar Medina C, Echevarría-Uraga JJ, … García-Alonso I. Proposal of new safety limits for in vivo experiments of magnetic hyperthermia antitumor therapy. Cancers. 2022;14:3084.
76. Kouzoudis D, Samourgkanidis G, Kolokithas-Ntoukas A, Zoppellaro G, Spiliotopoulos K. Magnetic hyperthermia in the 400–1,100 kHz frequency range using MIONs of condensed colloidal nanocrystal clusters. Frontiers in Materials. 2021;8:638019.
77. Llacer-Wintle J, Renz J, Hertle L, Veciana A, von Arx D, Wu J, … Pané S. The magnetopyroelectric effect: Heat-mediated magnetoelectricity in magnetic nanoparticle-ferroelectric polymer composites. Materials Horizons. 2023;10:2627–2637.
78. Marrella A, Giannoni P, Lenzuni M, Suarato G, Fiocchi S, Chiaramello E, Ravazzani P. Temperature-dependent cytokine neutralization induced by magnetoelectric nanoparticles: An in silico study. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024;25:13591.
79. Papadopoulos K, et al. Cation substitution and size confinement effects on structure, magnetism and magnetic hyperthermia of BiFeO3-based multiferroic nanoparticles and hydrogels. Journal of Alloys and Compounds. 2023;969:172337.
80. Hossain S, Guo R, Bhalla A. Finite element analysis of smart magnetoelectric cobalt ferrite-barium titanate core-shell nanocomposites at inducing localized hyperthermia. International Journal of Nanoscience. 2025;24:2450019.
81. Murali N, et al. Remotely controlled surface charge modulation of magnetoelectric nanogenerators for swift and efficient drug delivery. ACS Omega. 2024;9:28937–28950.
82. Shahzad K, et al. Field-controlled magnetoelectric core-shell CoFe₂O₄@ BaTiO₃ nanoparticles as effective drug carriers and drug release in vitro. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2021;119:111444.

[1] 1. Shi J, Kantoff PW, Wooster R, Farokhzad OC. Cancer nanomedicine: Progress, challenges and opportunities. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2017;17:20–37.

[2] 2. van der Meel R, et al. Smart cancer nanomedicine. Nature Nanotechnology. 2019;14:1007–1017.

[3] 3. Bhatia SN, Chen X, Dobrovolskaia MA, Lammers T. Cancer nanomedicine. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2022;22:550–556.

[4] 4. Mendes BB, et al. Nanodelivery of nucleic acids. Nature Reviews Methods Primers. 2022;2:24.

[5] 5. Wang B, et al. Current advance of nanotechnology in diagnosis and treatment for malignant tumors. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. 2024;9:200.

[6] 6. Mitragotri S, et al. Accelerating the translation of nanomaterials in biomedicine. ACS Nano. 2015;9:6644–6654.

[7] 7. Kim ST, Saha K, Kim C, Rotello VM. The role of surface functionality in determining nanoparticle cytotoxicity. Accounts of Chemical Research. 2013;46:681–691.

[8] 8. Canal C, Aparicio RM, Vilchez A, Esquena J, García-Celma MJ. Drug delivery properties of macroporous polystyrene solid foams. Journal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2012;15:197–207.

[9] 9. Silvera Batista CA, Larson RG, Kotov NA. Nonadditivity of nanoparticle interactions. Science. 2015;350:1242477.

[10] 10. Altammar KA. A review on nanoparticles: Characteristics, synthesis, applications, and challenges. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2023;14:1155622.

[11] 11. Naim A, Khan MI, Khan MF, Balqis SN, Kumar A. Navigating the Tightrope: Ethical challenges and standards in medical accreditation. Global Perspectives on Quality Management and Accreditation in Higher Education. 2025;169–186.

[12] 12. Yusuf A, Almotairy ARZ, Henidi H, Alshehri OY, Aldughaim MS. Nanoparticles as drug delivery systems: A review of the implication of nanoparticles’ physicochemical properties on responses in biological systems. Polymers. 2023;15:1596.

[13] 13. Liu JF, Jang B, Issadore D, Tsourkas A. Use of magnetic fields and nanoparticles to trigger drug release and improve tumor targeting. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology. 2019;11:e1571.

[14] 14. Li W, Liu Y, Qian Z, Yang Y. Evaluation of tumor treatment of magnetic nanoparticles driven by extremely low frequency magnetic field. Scientific Reports. 2017;7:46287.

[15] 15. Kumar CS, Mohammad F. Magnetic nanomaterials for hyperthermia-based therapy and controlled drug delivery. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 2011;63:789–808.

[16] 16. Price PM, Mahmoud WE, Al-Ghamdi AA, Bronstein LM. Magnetic drug delivery: Where the field is going. Frontiers in Chemistry. 2018;6:619.

[17] 17. Eguchi H, et al. A ferromagnetic compound with anti-cancer proeprties for controlled drug delivery and imaging. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:9194.

[18] 18. Sato I, et al. Simultaneous hyperthermia-chemotherapy with controlled drug delivery using single-drug nanoparticles. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:24629.

[19] 19. Nwabunwanne C, et al. Magnetic nanoparticles: Biosynthesis, characterization, surface functionalization and biomedical applications. Journal of the Indian Chemical Society. 2025;102(3):101617.

[20] 20. Yang HY, Li Y, Lee DS. Functionalization of magnetic nanoparticles with organic ligands toward biomedical applications. Advanced NanoBiomed Research. 2021;1:2000043.

[21] 21. Chand K, Vasquez‐Guardado ES. Magnetic nanoparticles: Synthesis and applications in life sciences. ChemistryOpen. 2025;14(12):e202500214.

[22] 22. Xing Z-C, Chang Y, Kang I-K. Immobilization of biomolecules on the surface of inorganic nanoparticles for biomedical applications. Science and Technology of Advanced Materials. 2010;11:014101.

[23] 23. Paul NL, Carpa R, Ionescu RE, Popa CO. The biomedical limitations of magnetic nanoparticles and a biocompatible alternative in the form of magnetotactic bacteria. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2025;16:231.

[24] 24. Jain TK, Reddy MK, Morales MA, Leslie-Pelecky DL, Labhasetwar V. Biodistribution, clearance, and biocompatibility of iron oxide magnetic nanoparticles in rats. Molecular Pharmaceutics. 2008;5:316–327.

[25] 25. Kolishetti N, et al. Recent advances, status, and opportunities of magneto-electric nanocarriers for biomedical applications. Molecular Aspects of Medicine. 2022;83:101046.

[26] 26. Fiocchi S, et al. Modeling of core-shell magneto-electric nanoparticles for biomedical applications: Effect of composition, dimension, and magnetic field features on magnetoelectric response. PloS One. 2022;17:e0274676.

[27] 27. Marrella A, et al. Magnetoelectric nanoparticles shape modulates their electrical output. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. 2023;11:1219777.

[28] 28. Ramezani Z, André V, Khizroev S. Modeling the effect of magnetoelectric nanoparticles on neuronal electrical activity: An analog circuit approach. Biointerphases. 2024;19:031001.

[29] 29. Shotbolt M, Bryant J, Liang P, Khizroev S. Mechanism and applications of magnetoelectric nanoparticles in cancer therapy. Nanomedicine. 2025;1–13.

[30] 30. Hadouch Y, et al. Current advances in magnetoelectric composites with various interphase connectivity types. Sustainable Energy & Fuels. 2025; 9:1957–1992.

[31] 31. Stimphil E, et al. Physics considerations in targeted anticancer drug delivery by magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Applied Physics Reviews. 2017;4:021101.

[32] 32. Mhambi S, Fisher D, Tchokonte MBT, Dube A. Permeation challenges of drugs for treatment of neurological tuberculosis and hiv and the application of magneto-electric nanoparticle drug delivery systems. Pharmaceutics. 2021;13:1479.

[33] 33. Xiong L, Liang B, Yu K. Magnetic hyperthermia in oncology: Nanomaterials-driven combinatorial strategies for synergistic therapeutic gains. Materials Today Bio. 2025. p. 102070.

[34] 34. Fernandes S, et al. Magnetic nanoparticle-based hyperthermia mediates drug delivery and impairs the tumorigenic capacity of quiescent colorectal cancer stem cells. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 2021;13:15959–15972.

[35] 35. Vezzoni A, et al. Computational insights into magnetoelectric nanoparticles for neural stimulation. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 2025;19:1583152.

[36] 36. Andre V, et al. Foundational insights for theranostic applications of magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Nanoscale Horizons. 2025;10:699–718.

[37] 37. Zhang E, et al. Magnetic-field-synchronized wireless modulation of neural activity by magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Brain Stimulation. 2022;15:1451–1462.

[38] 38. Lin J, Yu Y, Shigdar S, Fang DZ, Du JR, Wei MQ, … Duan W. Enhanced antitumor efficacy and reduced systemic toxicity of sulfatide-containing nanoliposomal doxorubicin in a xenograft model of colorectal cancer. PLOS ONE. 2012;7:e49277.

[39] 39. Khanna L, Prasad SR, Yedururi S, Parameswaran AM, Marcal LP, Sandrasegaran K, Katabathina VS. Second malignancies after radiation therapy: update on pathogenesis and cross-sectional imaging findings. Radiographics. 2021;41:876–894.

[40] 40. Gunaydin G, Gedik ME, Ayan S. Photodynamic therapy for the treatment and diagnosis of cancer-a review of the current clinical status. Frontiers in Chemistry. 2021;9:686303.

[41] 41. Zhang YF, Lu M. Advances in magnetic induction hyperthermia. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. 2024;12:1432189.

[42] 42. Guduru R, Liang P, Runowicz C, Nair M, Atluri V, Khizroev S. Magneto-electric nanoparticles to enable field-controlled high-specificity drug delivery to eradicate ovarian cancer cells. Scientific Reports. 2013;3:2953.

[43] 43. Rodzinski A, Guduru R, Liang P, Hadjikhani A, Stewart T, Stimphil E, … Khizroev S. Targeted and controlled anticancer drug delivery and release with magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:20867.

[44] 44. Nizamov TR, et al. Synthesis and functional characterization ofCoxFe3− xO₄-BaTiO₃ magnetoelectric nanocomposites for biomedical applications. Nanomaterials. 2023;13:811.

[45] 45. Kopyl S, Surmenev R, Surmeneva M, Fetisov Y, Kholkin A. Magnetoelectric effect: Principles and applications in biology and medicine– A review. Materials Today Bio. 2021;12:100149.

[46] 46. Tommasini A, et al. Exploring magnetoelectric nanoparticles for advanced nano-electroporation and drug delivery in interventional cardiology. Nanoscale Advances. 2025;7:5978–5992.

[47] 47. Corral-Flores V, Bueno-Baques D, Ziolo RD. Synthesis and characterization of novel CoFe₂O₄–BaTiO₃ multiferroic core–shell-type nanostructures. Acta Materialia. 2010;58:764–769.

[48] 48. Song H, et al. Multi-target cell therapy using a magnetoelectric microscale biorobot for targeted delivery and selective differentiation of SH-SY5Y cells via magnetically driven cell stamping. Materials Horizons. 2022;9:3031–3038.

[49] 49. Song H, Listyawan MA, Ryu. Core–shell magnetoelectric nanoparticles: Materials, synthesis, magnetoelectricity, and applications. Actuators. 2022;11:380.

[50] 50. Rodzinski A, et al. A novel mechanism for field-controlled high-specificity targeted anticancer drug delivery and on-demand release using magnetoelectric nanoparticles. Cancer Research. 2016;76:B47–B47.

[51] 51. Nair M, et al. Externally controlled on-demand release of anti-HIV drug using magneto-electric nanoparticles as carriers. Nature Communications. 2013;4:1707.

[52] 52. Mushtaq S, Shahzad K, Rizwan M, Ul-Hamid A, Abbasi BH. Magnetoelectric core–shell CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ nanorods: Their role in drug delivery and effect on multidrug resistance pump activity in vitro. RSC Advances. 2022;12:24958–24979.

[53] 53. Stewart TS, Nagesetti A, Guduru R, Liang P, Stimphil E, Hadjikhani A, … Khizroev S. Magnetoelectric nanoparticles for delivery of antitumor peptides into glioblastoma cells by magnetic fields. Nanomedicine. 2018;13:423–438.

[54] 54. Huang R, Li W, Lv X, Lei Z, Bian Y, Deng H, … Li X. BBB-penetrating magnetoelectric nanoparticles with sustainable Gel formulation for enhanced chemotherapy and reduced postoperative glioma recurrence. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2024;496:154208.

[55] 55. Mushtaq S, et al. Magnetoelectric core–shell CoFe₂O₄@BaTiO₃ nanorods: Their role in drug delivery and effect on multidrug resistance pump activity in vitro. RSC Advances. 2022;12:24958–24979.

[56] 56. Murali N, Rainu SK, Sharma A, Siddhanta S, Singh N, Betal S. Remotely controlled surface charge modulation of magnetoelectric nanogenerators for swift and efficient drug delivery. ACS Omega. 2024;9:28937–28950.

[57] 57. Martinelli C, Biglietti M. Nanotechnological approaches for counteracting multidrug resistance in cancer. Cancer Drug Resistance. 2020;3:1003.

[58] 58. Stewart TS, et al. Magnetoelectric nanoparticles for delivery of antitumor peptides into glioblastoma cells by magnetic fields. Nanomedicine. 2018;13:423–438.

[59] 59. Huang R, et al. BBB-penetrating magnetoelectric nanoparticles with sustainable Gel formulation for enhanced chemotherapy and reduced postoperative glioma recurrence. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2024;496:154208.

[60] 60. Stewart T, et al. Magnetoelectric particles cross blood brain barrier to deliver anti-tumor peptide to glioblastoma cells with on-demand release. Cancer Research. 2016;76:1346–1346.

[61] 61. Tang L, Feng Y, Gao S, Mu Q, Liu C. Nanotherapeutics overcoming the blood-brain barrier for glioblastoma treatment. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2021;12:786700.

[62] 62. Kaushik A, et al. Magnetically guided non-invasive CRISPR-Cas9/gRNA delivery across blood-brain barrier to eradicate latent HIV-1 infection. Scientific Reports. 2019;9:3928.

[63] 63. Andre M, et al. Magnetoelectric extracellular vesicle latency-targeting (MELT) nanotherapeutic for the block-lock-and-kill HIV eradication strategy. Biomedicines. 2025;13:147.

[64] 64. Hedayatnasab Z, Abnisa F, Daud WMAW. Review on magnetic nanoparticles for magnetic nanofluid hyperthermia application. Materials & Design. 2017;123:174–196.

[65] 65. Liu X, et al. Comprehensive understanding of magnetic hyperthermia for improving antitumor therapeutic efficacy. Theranostics. 2020;10:3793.

[66] 66. Barrera G, Allia P, Tiberto P. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia enhanced by a rotating field. Physical Review Applied. 2024;21:064037.

[67] 67. Kwizera EA, Stewart S, Mahmud MM, He X. Magnetic nanoparticle-mediated heating for biomedical applications. Journal of Heat Transfer. 2022;144:030801.

[68] 68. Giustini AJ, et al. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia in cancer treatment. Nano Life. 2010;1:17–32.

[69] 69. Llacer-Wintle J, et al. The magnetopyroelectric effect: Heat-mediated magnetoelectricity in magnetic nanoparticle-ferroelectric polymer composites. Materials Horizons. 2023;10:2627–2637.

[70] 70. Apostolov AT, Apostolova IN, Wesselinowa JM. Multiferroic and phonon properties of the double perovskite Pr2FeAlO6. Materials. 2024;17:4785.

[71] 71. Liu X, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Zhu W, Li G, Ma X, … Liang XJ. Comprehensive understanding of magnetic hyperthermia for improving antitumor therapeutic efficacy. Theranostics. 2020;10:3793.

[72] 72. Giustini AJ, Petryk AA, Cassim SM, Tate JA, Baker IAN, Hoopes PJ. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia in cancer treatment. Nano Life. 2010;1:17–32.

[73] 73. Barrera G, Allia P, Tiberto P. Magnetic nanoparticle hyperthermia enhanced by a rotating field. Physical Review Applied. 2024;21:064037.

[74] 74. Kwizera EA, Stewart S, Mahmud MM, He X. Magnetic nanoparticle-mediated heating for biomedical applications. Journal of Heat Transfer. 2022;144:030801.

[75] 75. Herrero de la Parte B, Rodrigo I, Gutiérrez-Basoa J, Iturrizaga Correcher S, Mar Medina C, Echevarría-Uraga JJ, … García-Alonso I. Proposal of new safety limits for in vivo experiments of magnetic hyperthermia antitumor therapy. Cancers. 2022;14:3084.

[76] 76. Kouzoudis D, Samourgkanidis G, Kolokithas-Ntoukas A, Zoppellaro G, Spiliotopoulos K. Magnetic hyperthermia in the 400–1,100 kHz frequency range using MIONs of condensed colloidal nanocrystal clusters. Frontiers in Materials. 2021;8:638019.

[77] 77. Llacer-Wintle J, Renz J, Hertle L, Veciana A, von Arx D, Wu J, … Pané S. The magnetopyroelectric effect: Heat-mediated magnetoelectricity in magnetic nanoparticle-ferroelectric polymer composites. Materials Horizons. 2023;10:2627–2637.

[78] 78. Marrella A, Giannoni P, Lenzuni M, Suarato G, Fiocchi S, Chiaramello E, Ravazzani P. Temperature-dependent cytokine neutralization induced by magnetoelectric nanoparticles: An in silico study. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024;25:13591.

[79] 79. Papadopoulos K, et al. Cation substitution and size confinement effects on structure, magnetism and magnetic hyperthermia of BiFeO3-based multiferroic nanoparticles and hydrogels. Journal of Alloys and Compounds. 2023;969:172337.

[80] 80. Hossain S, Guo R, Bhalla A. Finite element analysis of smart magnetoelectric cobalt ferrite-barium titanate core-shell nanocomposites at inducing localized hyperthermia. International Journal of Nanoscience. 2025;24:2450019.

[81] 81. Murali N, et al. Remotely controlled surface charge modulation of magnetoelectric nanogenerators for swift and efficient drug delivery. ACS Omega. 2024;9:28937–28950.

[82] 82. Shahzad K, et al. Field-controlled magnetoelectric core-shell CoFe₂O₄@ BaTiO₃ nanoparticles as effective drug carriers and drug release in vitro. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2021;119:111444.