Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31554927›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2019

Pharmacological modulation of nucleic acid sensors - therapeutic potential and persisting obstacles.

Claire Vanpouille-Box, Jules A Hoffmann, Lorenzo Galluzzi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing papers in PubMed
–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

116 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Lactylation: a novel post-translational modification for cGAS-STING pathway.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Regulation of inflammatory processes by caspases.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2025
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

56 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

3 authors.

Claire Vanpouille-BoxDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7213-0670
Jules A HoffmannUniversity of Strasbourg Institute for Advanced Studies, Strasbourg, France.
Lorenzo GalluzziDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. deadoc80@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2257-8500

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nucleic acid sensors, primarily TLR and RLR family members, as well as cGAS-STING signalling, play a critical role in the preservation of cellular and organismal homeostasis. Accordingly, deregulated nucleic acid sensing contributes to the origin of a diverse range of disorders, including infectious diseases, as well as cardiovascular, autoimmune and neoplastic conditions. Accumulating evidence indicates that normalizing aberrant nucleic acid sensing can mediate robust therapeutic effects. However, targeting nucleic acid sensors with pharmacological agents, such as STING agonists, presents multiple obstacles, including drug-, target-, disease- and host-related issues. Here, we discuss preclinical and clinical data supporting the potential of this therapeutic paradigm and highlight key limitations and possible strategies to overcome them.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsCancer VaccinesHumansImmunity, InnateNeoplasmsNucleic AcidsSignal TransductionAntineoplastic AgentsCancer VaccinesNucleic Acids

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.