Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34067243›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Possible Beneficial Actions of Caffeine in SARS-CoV-2.

Bianca S Romero-Martínez, Luis M Montaño, Héctor Solís-Chagoyán, Bettina Sommer, Gemma Lizbeth Ramírez-Salinas, Gloria E Pérez-Figueroa, Edgar Flores-Soto

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Inhibitory Activity ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Characterization ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Bianca S Romero-MartínezDepartamento de Farmacología, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, CDMX CP 04510, Mexico.
Luis M MontañoDepartamento de Farmacología, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, CDMX CP 04510, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-0065-1298
Héctor Solís-ChagoyánLaboratorio de Neurofarmacología, Instituto Nacional de Psiquiatría Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz, CDMX CP 14370, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-0692-6931
Bettina SommerLaboratorio de Hiperreactividad Bronquial, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias "Ismael Cosío Villegas", CDMX CP 14080, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-1292-9418
Gemma Lizbeth Ramírez-SalinasLaboratorio de Diseño y Desarrollo de Nuevos Fármacos e Innovación Biotécnológica (Laboratory for the Design and Development of New Drugs and Biotechnological Innovation), Escuela Superior de Medicina, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, CDMX CP 11340, Mexico.
Gloria E Pérez-FigueroaLaboratorio de Investigación en Inmunología y Proteómica, Hospital Infantil de México Federico Gómez, CDMX CP 06720, Mexico.
Edgar Flores-SotoDepartamento de Farmacología, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, CDMX CP 04510, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-2649-8751
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México · MXHospital Infantil de México Federico Gómez · MXInstituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias · MXInstituto Nacional de Psiquiatría Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz · MXInstituto Politécnico Nacional · MX

Funding

Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología application # 2020-000013-01NACF-12778; CVU 469822Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico (DGAPA) IN204319
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has established an unparalleled necessity to rapidly find effective treatments for the illness; unfortunately, no specific treatment has been found yet. As this is a new emerging chaotic situation, already existing drugs have been suggested to ameliorate the infection of SARS-CoV-2. The consumption of caffeine has been suggested primarily because it improves exercise performance, reduces fatigue, and increases wakefulness and awareness. Caffeine has been proven to be an effective anti-inflammatory and immunomodulator. In airway smooth muscle, it has bronchodilator effects mainly due to its activity as a phosphodiesterase inhibitor and adenosine receptor antagonist. In addition, a recent published document has suggested the potential antiviral activity of this drug using in silico molecular dynamics and molecular docking; in this regard, caffeine might block the viral entrance into host cells by inhibiting the formation of a receptor-binding domain and the angiotensin-converting enzyme complex and, additionally, might reduce viral replication by the inhibition of the activity of 3-chymotrypsin-like proteases. Here, we discuss how caffeine through certain mechanisms of action could be beneficial in SARS-CoV-2. Nevertheless, further studies are required for validation through in vitro and in vivo models.

Indexed as

Anti-Inflammatory AgentsAntiviral AgentsCaffeineCOVID-19Drug RepositioningHumansImmunologic FactorsMolecular Dynamics SimulationMuscle, SmoothPhosphodiesterase InhibitorsPhosphoric Diester HydrolasesSARS-CoV-2Anti-Inflammatory AgentsAntiviral AgentsCaffeineImmunologic FactorsPhosphodiesterase InhibitorsPhosphoric Diester Hydrolasesairway smooth muscleantiviral activitycaffeineCOVID-19immunomodulatory effectsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID34067243
PMCPMC8196824
OpenAlexW3164655444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.