Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31056843›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology2019

Drug screening in Drosophila; why, when, and when not?

Tin Tin Su

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Landscape ofBiology · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Medical science pulse · 2025
    Article
  12. A Drug Screening Platform for Podocytopathies in Drosophila Nephrocytes.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. SVC112: From Hummingbirds to Head and Neck Cancer.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tin Tin SuDepartment of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.
University of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

Cellular Plasticity and Regeneration after Radiation Damage in DrosophilaR35GM130374 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO · PI Tin Tin Su · 2019 to 2026
$3.2M
Consequences of Cell Death in DrosophilaR01GM106317 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO · PI SU, TIN TIN · 2014 to 2017
$1.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM106317NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM130374NIH HHS R01 GM106317NIH HHS R35 GM130374
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The best global seller among oncology drugs in 2018 is lenalidomide, an analog of thalidomide. It took 53 years and a circuitous route from the discovery of thalidomide to approval of an analog for use in treatment of cancer. We understand now a lot more about the genetic and molecular basis of diseases than we did in 1953 when thalidomide was discovered. We have also no shortage of chemical libraries with hundreds of thousands of compounds, both synthetic and natural. What we need are better ways to search among these rich resources for compounds with the potential to do what we want them to do. This review summarizes examples from the literature that make Drosophila melanogaster a good model to screen for drugs, and discusses knowledge gaps and technical challenges that make Drosophila models not as widely used as they could or should be. This article is categorized under: Technologies > Analysis of Cell, Tissue, and Animal Phenotypes.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAnimalsDrosophilaDrug DiscoveryDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalDrugs, InvestigationalHumansTranslational Research, BiomedicalDrugs, InvestigationalcancerDrosophiladrug-screeningneurodegeneration

Identifiers

PMID31056843
PMCPMC6786905
OpenAlexW2944573685

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.