Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24333896›Full record

ReviewAdvanced drug delivery reviews2014

C. elegans in high-throughput drug discovery.

Linda P O'Reilly, Cliff J Luke, David H Perlmutter, Gary A Silverman, Stephen C Pak

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced drug delivery reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 124 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
124citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

124 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. β-alanine betaine and nAChRs inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Chalcone andMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Dietary mycotoxin toxicity inAdvances in neurotoxicology · 2026
    Article
  14. Review
  15. TheInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

64 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Linda P O'ReillyDepartment of Pediatrics, Cell Biology and Physiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4401 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15224,USA.
Cliff J LukeDepartment of Pediatrics, Cell Biology and Physiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4401 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15224,USA.
David H PerlmutterDepartment of Pediatrics, Cell Biology and Physiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4401 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15224,USA.
Gary A SilvermanDepartment of Pediatrics, Cell Biology and Physiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4401 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15224,USA.
Stephen C PakDepartment of Pediatrics, Cell Biology and Physiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4401 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15224,USA. Electronic address: paksc@upmc.edu.

Funding

Treating AT Deficiency with Drugs that Modulate the Proteostasis NetworkP01DK096990 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI SILVERMAN, GARY ARTHUR · 2012 to 2023
$18.3M
High Throughput Genetic and Drug Screens for Alph-1-Antitrypsin DeficiencyR01DK079806 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI SILVERMAN, GARY ARTHUR · 2008 to 2011
$2.4M
Novel Pharmacological Strategies for Liver Disease in Antitrypsin DeficiencyR01DK084512 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI PERLMUTTER, DAVID H · 2009 to 2012
$1.6M
NIDDK NIH HHS P01 DK096990NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK079806NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK084512
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Caenorhabditis elegans has been proven to be a useful model organism for investigating molecular and cellular aspects of numerous human diseases. More recently, investigators have explored the use of this organism as a tool for drug discovery. Although earlier drug screens were labor-intensive and low in throughput, recent advances in high-throughput liquid workflows, imaging platforms and data analysis software have made C. elegans a viable option for automated high-throughput drug screens. This review will outline the evolution of C. elegans-based drug screening, discuss the inherent challenges of using C. elegans, and highlight recent technological advances that have paved the way for future drug screens.

Indexed as

AnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansDrug DiscoveryHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysHumansClozapine (PubChem CID: 2818)Drug target identificationFluphenazine (PubChem CID: 3372)High-throughput screeningHuman disease modelsNemadipine-A (PubChem CID: 2856102)PharmaceuticalsPhenotypic analysisSmall moleculesWhole organism model

Identifiers

PMID24333896
PMCPMC4019719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.