Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31695329›Full record

ReviewDrug design, development and therapy2019

In-vitro blood-brain barrier models for drug screening and permeation studies: an overview.

Sounak Bagchi, Tanya Chhibber, Behnaz Lahooti, Angela Verma, Vivek Borse, Rahul Dev Jayant

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Drug design, development and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 105 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

105 citing papers in PubMed, 219 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. BBB-Permeable PROTACs: Where Do We Stand?ACS medicinal chemistry letters · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Bioactive Metabolites fromCurrent developments in nutrition · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

45 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sounak BagchiDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Amarillo, TX 79106, USA.
Tanya ChhibberDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Amarillo, TX 79106, USA.
Behnaz LahootiDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Amarillo, TX 79106, USA.
Angela VermaDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Amarillo, TX 79106, USA.
Vivek BorseCentre for Nanotechnology, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati, Assam 781039, India.
Rahul Dev JayantDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Amarillo, TX 79106, USA.
Texas Tech University · USIndian Institute of Technology Guwahati · IN

Funding

Intranasal Nanodelivery of Oxytocin to Treat Morphine Addiction in HIV Patients by Gene EditingR03DA044877 · NIDA · TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIS CENTER · PI JAYANT, RAHUL DEV · 2017 to 2018
$300k
NIDA NIH HHS R03 DA044877
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is comprised of brain microvascular endothelial central nervous system (CNS) cells, which communicate with other CNS cells (astrocytes, pericytes) and behave according to the state of the CNS, by responding against pathological environments and modulating disease progression. The BBB plays a crucial role in maintaining homeostasis in the CNS by maintaining restricted transport of toxic or harmful molecules, transport of nutrients, and removal of metabolites from the brain. Neurological disorders, such as NeuroHIV, cerebral stroke, brain tumors, and other neurodegenerative diseases increase the permeability of the BBB. While on the other hand, semipermeable nature of BBB restricts the movement of bigger molecules i.e. drugs or proteins (>500 kDa) across it, leading to minimal bioavailability of drugs in the CNS. This poses the most significant shortcoming in the development of therapeutics for CNS neurodegenerative disorders. Although the complexity of the BBB (dynamic and adaptable barrier) affects approaches of CNS drug delivery and promotes disease progression, understanding the composition and functions of BBB provides a platform for novel innovative approaches towards drug delivery to CNS. The methodical and scientific interests in the physiology and pathology of the BBB led to the development and the advancement of numerous in vitro models of the BBB. This review discusses the fundamentals of BBB structure, permeation mechanisms, an overview of all the different in-vitro BBB models with their advantages and disadvantages, and rationale of selecting penetration prediction methods towards the critical role in the development of the CNS therapeutics.

Indexed as

Drug Delivery SystemsBiological TransportBlood-Brain BarrierBrainCentral Nervous SystemHumansModels, BiologicalPermeabilityPharmaceutical PreparationsPharmaceutical PreparationsBBBblood-brain barrierBMECsbrain microvascular endothelial cellscentral nervous systemCNSinduced pluripotent cellsin-silico prediction methodsiPSCsproteinstight junctionsTJs

Identifiers

PMID31695329
PMCPMC6805046
OpenAlexW2981239143

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.