Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33870803›Full record

ArticleExpert opinion on drug discovery2021

Is PROTAC technology really a game changer for central nervous system drug discovery?

Kayla Farrell, Timothy J Jarome

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Expert opinion on drug discovery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. PROTACs in cancer therapy: targeted degradation of GPX4, PARP and epigenetic regulators.Journal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Phosphatase Signaling as a Therapeutic Strategy in Schizophrenia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Ubiquitin-modifying enzymes in Huntington's disease.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
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

2 authors.

Kayla FarrellDepartment of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, VA, USA.
Timothy J JaromeDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science and the School of Neuroscience, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA.

Funding

The sex-specific role of degradation-specific protein polyubiquitination in fear memory formationR01MH122414 · NIMH · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI JAROME, TIMOTHY JOSEPH · 2021 to 2025
$2.4M
Genome-wide analysis of sex differences in cortical DNA hydroxymethylation during fear memory formationR21MH123742 · NIMH · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI GILMARTIN, MARIEKE R, JAROME, TIMOTHY JOSEPH · 2020 to 2020
$426k
The role of linear ubiquitination in memory formationR21MH120569 · NIMH · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI JAROME, TIMOTHY JOSEPH · 2020 to 2021
$422k
Exploring epigenetic regulation of memory extinctionR21MH120498 · NIMH · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI JAROME, TIMOTHY JOSEPH, XIE, HEHUANG · 2020 to 2020
$419k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH122414NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH120498NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH120569NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH123742
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Central Nervous System AgentsDrug DiscoveryHumansProteolysisTechnologyCentral Nervous System AgentsAlzheimer’s diseasebraincentral nervous systemdegradationPROTAC

Identifiers

PMID33870803
PMCPMC8298267

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.