ArticleNitric oxide : biology and chemistry2023
Gaseous nitric oxide failed to inhibit the replication cycle of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro.
Article in Nitric oxide : biology and chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nitric Oxide in the Treatment of COVID-19: Nasal Sprays, Inhalants and Nanoparticles.Biochemistry research international · 2025Review
- The Potential Role of Nitric Oxide as a Therapeutic Agent against SARS-CoV-2 Infection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Inhaled nitric oxide: can it serve as a savior for COVID-19 and related respiratory and cardiovascular diseases?Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nitric oxide (NO) has been shown to have antimicrobial activity in vitro and in some in vivo models, while the virucidal activity of NO remains elusive. Some studies using NO donors have suggested that NO could be a potential candidate to treat SARS-CoV infection. The Covid-19 pandemic raised the hypothesis that NO gas might have an impact on Sars-CoV-2 replication cycle and might be considered as a candidate therapy to treat COVID-19. To our knowledge, there are no in vitro preclinical studies demonstrating a virucidal effect of gaseous NO on SARS-CoV-2. This study aims to determine whether gaseous NO has an impact on the replication cycle of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. To that end, SARS-CoV-2 infected epithelial (VeroE6) and pulmonary (A549-hACE2) cells were treated with repeated doses of gaseous NO at different concentrations known to be efficient against bacteria. Our results show that exposing SARS-CoV-2 infected-cells to NO gas even at high doses (160 ppm, 6 h) does not influence the replication cycle of the virus in vitro. We report here that NO gas has no antiviral properties in vitro on SARS-COV-2. Therefore, there is no rationale for its usage in clinical settings to treat COVID-19 patients for direct antiviral purposes, which does not exclude other potential physiological benefits of this gas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.