ReviewToxins2017
A Review and Database of Snake Venom Proteomes.
Review in Toxins, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04996264 (Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of a Multi-Dose Regimen of Oral Varespladib-Methyl in Subjects Bitten by Venomous Snakes), which is not on this map. Cited by 309 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of a Multi-Dose Regimen of Oral Varespladib-Methyl in Subjects Bitten by Venomous Snakes
Who cites it
309 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 599 citations in OpenAlex.
- A review and in silico screening of plant-derived snake venom/toxin inhibitors: ADMET, drug-likeness, and medicinal chemistry profiling.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Computational immunology in venom research: a systematic review of epitope prediction and validation approaches.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Pooled it
- BrazilianToxins · 2026Article
- Harnessing snake venom cardiotoxins for antimicrobial peptide discovery.npj drug discovery · 2026Article
- The genomic origins and evolutionary path to a key innovation in the world's most venomous snakes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Engineering Antivenom: Research Progress and Future Directions in Snakebite Envenoming Therapy.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Review
- Venom-Derived Peptides in Breast Cancer: Pharmacological Mechanisms and Medicinal Chemistry-Guided Translational Development.Archiv der Pharmazie · 2026Review
- Targeting Key Enzymatic Snake Venom Proteins Using Repurposed Small Molecule Inhibitors: Emerging Adjuncts to Antivenom Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- A Case ofClinical case reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Venom variation and the future of antivenom design: Integrating population venomics, evolutionary toxinology, and precision therapeutics.Toxicon: X · 2026Review
- Quantifying venom in African snakes: Insights into protein content, yield and body size associations.Toxicon: X · 2026Article
- Novel antivenoms bite back.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- A Paradigm Shift in Snakebite Envenoming Therapy: From Conventional Antivenoms to Rationally Designed, Broadly Neutralizing Combination Therapies.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2026Review
- Antigenic divergence of cobra short-chain α-neurotoxins: Implications for regional antivenom effectiveness in Southeast Asia.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Effects of Cape Cobra (Toxins · 2026Article
- Identification of DC-174 as a Novel Hydroxamic Precandidate for the Development of an Oral Snakebite Treatment.Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2026Article
- Snake Venom Protease Detection and Inhibition in Serum.ChemMedChem · 2026Article
- Mechanism of Hyaluronic Acid Hydrolysis Catalyzed by Snake Venom Hyaluronidase.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
249 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in the last decade combining transcriptomics with established proteomics methods have made possible rapid identification and quantification of protein families in snake venoms. Although over 100 studies have been published, the value of this information is increased when it is collated, allowing rapid assimilation and evaluation of evolutionary trends, geographical variation, and possible medical implications. This review brings together all compositional studies of snake venom proteomes published in the last decade. Compositional studies were identified for 132 snake species: 42 from 360 (12%) Elapidae (elapids), 20 from 101 (20%) Viperinae (true vipers), 65 from 239 (27%) Crotalinae (pit vipers), and five species of non-front-fanged snakes. Approximately 90% of their total venom composition consisted of eight protein families for elapids, 11 protein families for viperines and ten protein families for crotalines. There were four dominant protein families: phospholipase A₂s (the most common across all front-fanged snakes), metalloproteases, serine proteases and three-finger toxins. There were six secondary protein families: cysteine-rich secretory proteins, l-amino acid oxidases, kunitz peptides, C-type lectins/snaclecs, disintegrins and natriuretic peptides. Elapid venoms contained mostly three-finger toxins and phospholipase A₂s and viper venoms metalloproteases, phospholipase A₂s and serine proteases. Although 63 protein families were identified, more than half were present in <5% of snake species studied and always in low abundance. The importance of these minor component proteins remains unknown.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.