“…Traditional medicines act as a double-edged sword, offering potent therapeutic effects while often resulting in multiple undesirable side effects. − In the pursuit of augmenting therapeutic potential and mitigating adverse effects, researchers have developed various strategies, broadly categorized into two paradigms: one involves partial covalent modification of drugs, known as prodrugs; − the other entails noncovalent encapsulation of drugs to form nanomedicines, such as using liposomes, polymers, dendrimers, and other nanocarriers for drug delivery. − Rationally designed prodrugs or nanomedicines can to some extent enhance the drug’s solubility, stability, bioavailability, targeting, and reduce toxicity. − Additionally, they each have distinct advantages and disadvantages. Prodrugs possess clear structures and a single composition, thus exhibiting ease of production and good reproducibility, which is advantageous for clinical translation. − However, covalent modification only protects specific regions of drug molecules, often proving less effective in improving stability and reducing drug toxicity. , In contrast, nanomedicines formed through noncovalent interactions fully encapsulate and shield drug molecules. − Nevertheless, any nanomedicines based on noncovalent assemblies are inherently concentration-sensitive, potentially causing premature drug release during in vivo circulation, leading to nonspecific activation or introducing uncertainties in structure and complexity in pharmacokinetics upon assembly dissociation. − This multicomponent or multidispersed nature imposes significant limitations on the clinical translation of self-assembled nanomedicines. , Therefore, developing a novel strategy for targeted controlled drug release with explicit structure and simple composition while ensuring effective shielding of drug molecules in vivo and intrinsic concentration-independent properties holds important practical significance.…”