Computational discovery of dual potential inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 spike/ACE2 and M

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.

1. Enhanced Intranasal Delivery of Atorvastatin via Superparamagnetic Iron-Oxide-Loaded Nanocarriers: Cytotoxicity and Inflammation Evaluation and In Vivo, In Silico, and Network Pharmacology Study for Targeting Glioblastoma Management.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
   Article
2. Establishment of a Yeast Two-Hybrid-Based High-Throughput Screening Model for Selection of SARS-CoV-2 Spike-ACE2 Interaction Inhibitors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
   Article
3. Charantin targets HMGCR-PCSK9 axis and activates PPAR-α signaling to ameliorate hyperlipidemia: Mechanistic insights from bioinformatics and in-vivo studies.PloS one · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Funding

Abstract

Indexed as