ArticleScientific reports2025
Investigating blood-brain barrier penetration and neurotoxicity of natural products for central nervous system drug development.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engineered Exosomes in Precision Neuro-Oncology: Mechanisms, Therapeutics, and Translational Challenges.Cancers · 2026Review
- Natural Products in Epilepsy Treatment: From Traditional Medicine Towards Computational Drug Discovery.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- From Polyphenols to Prodrugs: Bridging the Blood-Brain Barrier with Nanomedicine and Neurotherapeutics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Stabilization of CXCL12 (SDF-1α) via silk fibroin films enhances stem cell migration/retention and functional recovery after stroke.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Article
- Therapeutic Approaches Interfering with Nuclear Localization Signals: An Emerging Strategy for CNS-Related Diseases.Current neuropharmacology · 2026Review
- Modulation of programmed cell death by botanical drugs in Alzheimer's disease: a review from a traditional Chinese medicine perspective.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Review
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Natural Products (NPs) are increasingly utilized worldwide for their potential therapeutic benefits, including central nervous system (CNS) disorders. Studies have shown açai berries mitigating Parkinson's disease progression through dopaminergic neuroprotection via Nrf-2 HO-1 pathways. Ashwagandha, an evergreen shrub, has shown potential as a therapeutic for neurodegenerative disorders via axonal regeneration in Aβ25-35-treated cortical neurons in vitro. In most cases, promising NPs are tested using in vitro assays or simpler systems during the early stages of drug discovery. However, a critical challenge lies in the lack of data on blood-brain barrier (BBB) penetration, which is a significant determinant for the successful development of CNS drugs. Our first goal was to test our in-house NP constituent library via the Parallel Artificial Membrane Permeability Assay (PAMPA-BBB), with the aim of understanding their BBB-penetration potential. Of the constituents tested, 255 were found to have moderate to high BBB permeability. Our next goal was to understand if these compounds could exhibit CNS toxicity. Neuronal viability and neurite outgrowth assays were performed with this subset to identify compounds with neurotoxicity potential. Around 35% of compounds tested showed neurite outgrowth inhibition. The habitual and widespread consumption of NPs underscores the importance of subjecting this subset of compounds to additional testing and validation in vivo to ascertain their potential detrimental effects. Understanding BBB permeability and assessing neurotoxicity mechanisms of NPs will significantly benefit the CNS drug discovery community.
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.