Successfully translating anti-cancer nanomedicines from pre-clinical proof of concept to demonstration of therapeutic value in the clinic is challenging. Having made significant advances with drug delivery technologies, we must learn from other areas of oncology drug development, where patient stratification and target-driven design have improved patient outcomes. We should evolve our nanomedicine development strategies to build the patient and disease into the line of sight from the outset. The success of small molecule targeted therapies has been significantly improved by employing a specific decision-making framework, such as AstraZeneca's 5R principle: right target/efficacy, right tissue/exposure, right safety, right patient, and right commercial potential. With appropriate investment and collaboration to generate a platform of evidence supporting the end clinical application, a similar framework can be established for enhancing nanomedicine translation and performance. Building informative data packages to answer these questions requires the following: (I) an improved understanding of the heterogeneity of clinical cancers and of the biological factors influencing the behaviour of nanomedicines in patient tumours; (II) a transition from formulation-driven research to disease-driven development; (III) the implementation of more relevant animal models and testing protocols; and (IV) the pre-selection of the patients most likely to respond to nanomedicine therapies. These challenges must be overcome to improve (the cost-effectiveness of) nanomedicine development and translation, and they are key to establishing superior therapies for patients.

Following its discovery more than 30 years ago, the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect has become the guiding principle for cancer nanomedicine development. Over the years, the tumor-targeted drug delivery field has made significant progress, as evidenced by the approval of several nanomedicinal anticancer drugs. Recently, however, the existence and the extent of the EPR effect - particularly in patients - have become the focus of intense debate. This is partially due to the disbalance between the huge number of preclinical cancer nanomedicine papers and relatively small number of cancer nanomedicine drug products reaching the market. To move the field forward, we have to improve our understanding of the EPR effect, of its cancer type-specific pathophysiology, of nanomedicine interactions with the heterogeneous tumor microenvironment, of nanomedicine behavior in the body, and of translational aspects that specifically complicate nanomedicinal drug development. In this virtual special issue, 24 research articles and reviews discussing different aspects of the EPR effect and cancer nanomedicine are collected, together providing a comprehensive and complete overview of the current state-of-the-art and future directions in tumor-targeted drug delivery.