TITLE:
Gold Nanoparticles in Cancer Imaging and Treatment: A Narrative Review of Preclinical Progress and Translational Challenges
AUTHORS:
Megan Nguyen, Ambuj Bhalla, Breana Nguyen, Abby Grace Lin, Bosco Giap, Huan Giap
KEYWORDS:
Gold Nanoparticles, Cancer Imaging, Radiation Therapy, Chemoradiotherapy, Proton Therapy, Radiosensitization
JOURNAL NAME:
International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology,
Vol.15 No.2,
May
13,
2026
ABSTRACT: Background and Objective: Nanotechnology has emerged as a promising area in oncology for improving tumor imaging, treatment selectivity, and therapeutic response. Among the nanomaterials under investigation, gold nanoparticles (GNPs) have attracted substantial interest because of their tunable surface chemistry, high atomic number, and optical properties. This narrative review summarizes the current literature on GNP applications in cancer imaging, radiosensitization, and chemotherapy support, with particular emphasis on the translational gap between preclinical findings and clinical implementation. Methods: A narrative review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. English-language articles published through January 2026 were screened using combinations of the terms “gold nanoparticles”, “cancer imaging”, “computed tomography”, “magnetic resonance imaging”, “radiosensitization”, “radiotherapy”, “chemotherapy”, and “chemoradiotherapy”. Original studies and review articles addressing oncologic applications of GNPs were considered. Articles were excluded if they were non-English, not peer reviewed, not focused on cancer, or did not specifically evaluate gold nanoparticles. Evidence was synthesized across imaging, radiation-related applications, chemotherapy support, and translational limitations, with distinction made between in vitro, animal, and human data when available. Key Content and Findings: GNPs can enhance X-ray attenuation, serve as multifunctional imaging platforms, and increase radiation response through physical and biological mechanisms. They have also been investigated as drug-delivery and chemoradiotherapy-support platforms. However, much of the current evidence remains preclinical, and reported efficacy varies according to particle size, coating, tumor model, radiation energy, and delivery strategy. Clinical translation remains limited by concerns related to biodistribution, long-term safety, manufacturing reproducibility, and regulatory standardization. Conclusions: Gold nanoparticles remain a promising platform for oncologic imaging and therapy, but their clinical role has not yet been fully established. Future progress will depend on better standardization of nanoparticle design, more transparent study methodology, and stronger clinical evidence addressing safety, efficacy, and translational feasibility.