ReviewAnnual review of physiology2026
Interrogating Physiological Functions with Light and Chemicals.
Review in Annual review of physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A single-component optogenetic toolkit for reversible visualization and programmable control of microtubule dynamics.Cell reports methods · 2026Article
- Engineering viral protease-operated nanobodies for programmable and orthogonal control of protein function.Nature communications · 2026Article
- AI-GuidedJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2026Article
- Optical mapping: pioneering the frontier of preclinical antiarrhythmic drug evaluation.iScience · 2026Review
- Optogenetic Tools for Spatiotemporal Interrogation of Cytoskeletal Dynamics.Bioconjugate chemistry · 2026Review
- Peripheral nerve remodeling in the tumor microenvironment: neuro-immune crosstalk, molecular mechanisms, and precision therapeutic.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Genetically Encoded Tools to Monitor and Interrogate Membrane Contact Sites.Contact (Thousand Oaks (Ventura County, Calif.))Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Optogenetics and chemogenetics have transformed how physiologists interrogate biological systems by enabling precise control over protein activity and cellular function. Optogenetics uses light-sensitive proteins for rapid and localized control, while chemogenetics employs small molecules to trigger or block specific pathways with systemic and sustained effects. These tools have advanced research in areas such as brain function, heart rhythm, immune response, and gene regulation. They have been applied to disease models that include epilepsy, metabolic and cardiovascular diseases, immunoinflammatory disorders, and cancer. Clinical applications are emerging, such as optogenetic therapies for vision restoration and chemogenetic safety switches in engineered immune cells. In this review, we categorize these tools by their mechanisms of action, compare their advantages and limitations, and discuss strategies to improve their precision, efficiency, and translational capability. As these technologies continue to evolve, they offer powerful approaches to dissect complex physiological processes and drive innovative therapeutic interventions.
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.