Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38802930›Full record

SynthesisFluids and barriers of the CNS2024

Molecular determinants for brain targeting by peptides: a meta-analysis approach with experimental validation.

Marco Cavaco, Patrícia Fraga, Javier Valle, Ruben D M Silva, Lurdes Gano, João D G Correia, David Andreu, Miguel A R B Castanho, Vera Neves

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Fluids and barriers of the CNS, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. INBAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Peptide-functionalized nanoparticles for brain-targeted therapeutics.Drug delivery and translational research · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. New Trends in Brain Shuttle Peptides.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

9 authors.

Marco CavacoInstituto de Medicina Molecular João Lobo Antunes, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Prof. Egas Moniz, 1649-028, Lisbon, Portugal.
Patrícia FragaInstituto de Medicina Molecular João Lobo Antunes, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Prof. Egas Moniz, 1649-028, Lisbon, Portugal.
Javier ValleProteomics and Protein Chemistry Unit, Department of Medicine and Life Sciences, Pompeu Fabra University, Dr. Aiguader 88, Barcelona Biomedical Research Park, 08003, Barcelona, Spain.
Ruben D M SilvaCentro de Ciências E Tecnologias Nucleares, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, CTN, Estrada Nacional 10 (Km 139,7), 2695-066, Bobadela LRS, Portugal.
Lurdes GanoCentro de Ciências E Tecnologias Nucleares, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, CTN, Estrada Nacional 10 (Km 139,7), 2695-066, Bobadela LRS, Portugal.
João D G CorreiaCentro de Ciências E Tecnologias Nucleares, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, CTN, Estrada Nacional 10 (Km 139,7), 2695-066, Bobadela LRS, Portugal.
David AndreuProteomics and Protein Chemistry Unit, Department of Medicine and Life Sciences, Pompeu Fabra University, Dr. Aiguader 88, Barcelona Biomedical Research Park, 08003, Barcelona, Spain. david.andreu@upf.edu.
Miguel A R B CastanhoInstituto de Medicina Molecular João Lobo Antunes, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Prof. Egas Moniz, 1649-028, Lisbon, Portugal. macastanho@medicina.ulisboa.pt.
Vera NevesInstituto de Medicina Molecular João Lobo Antunes, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Av. Prof. Egas Moniz, 1649-028, Lisbon, Portugal. veraneves@medicina.ulisboa.pt.

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia LCF/PR/HP21/52310015Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia PTDC/BTM-MAT/2472/2021Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia PTDC/QUI-OUT/3854/2021H2020 Excellent Science 952455'la Caixa' Foundation 100010434"María de Maeztu" Program CEX2018-000792-M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood-brain barrier (BBB) peptide-shuttles (BBBpS) are able to translocate the BBB and reach the brain. Despite the importance of brain targeting in pharmacology, BBBpS are poorly characterized. Currently, their development relies on the empiric assumption that cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs), with proven ability to traverse lipid membranes, will likewise behave as a BBBpS. The relationship between CPPs/BBBpS remains elusive and, to the best of our knowledge, has not hitherto been subject to thorough experimental scrutiny. In this work, we have identified/quantified the main physicochemical properties of BBBpS and then searched for CPPs with these properties, hence potential BBBpS. The specific features found for BBBpS are: (i) small size, (ii) none or few aromatic residues, (iii) hydrophobic, and (iv) slight cationic nature. Then, we selected the 10 scoring best in an ordinary least squares analysis, and tested them in vitro and in vivo. Overall, we identified the molecular determinants for brain targeting by peptides, devised a methodology that can be used to assist in the design of peptides with potential brain penetration from amino acid residue sequences, and found four new BBBpS within the CPP library.

Indexed as

Blood-Brain BarrierBrainCell-Penetrating PeptidesAnimalsDrug Delivery SystemsHumansCell-Penetrating PeptidesBlood–brain barrier (BBB)Blood–brain barrier peptide shuttles (BBBpS)Brain deliveryCell-penetrating peptides (CPPs)Neurological disorders

Identifiers

PMID38802930
PMCPMC11131246

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.