ReviewRedox biology2026
Sex-based differences in the NRF2 oxidative stress response: Implications for precision therapeutics.
Review in Redox biology, 2026. 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.
- Genetic and pharmacologic modulations elucidate NRF2 protective role in acute pancreatitis.American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology · 2026Article
- Hepatic cellular stress response pathways exhibit species differences in basal and inducible activity.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026Article
- Reactive oxygen species and metabolic checkpoints shape plasmacytoid dendritic cell fate in infection and autoimmunity.Redox biology · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (NRF2) is a central regulator of antioxidant defences, mitochondrial function, and cellular stress responses, making its pharmacological activation a compelling strategy for neurodegenerative, metabolic, and cardiovascular diseases. Emerging evidence reveals that biological sex profoundly shapes NRF2 signalling, influencing basal activity, inducibility, and downstream functional outcomes. Females often exhibit higher NRF2 target gene expression in liver and kidney, whereas males may be more susceptible to oxidative or metabolic stress due to androgen-mediated suppression of the NRF2 pathway. Hormonal status, age, and tissue-specific receptor distribution further modulate these effects, suggesting that therapeutic responses to NRF2 activators are inherently sex-dependent. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences, including CYP3A-mediated metabolism and body composition, may additionally influence systemic exposure and safety profiles. Despite clinical use of NRF2 activators such as dimethyl fumarate and omaveloxolone, sex-stratified data on efficacy, dosing, and safety are scarce. This knowledge gap underscores the need for systematic evaluation of sex, hormonal milieu, and age in pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and clinical studies to ensure treatments are safe, effective, and equitable. Integrating these variables into research and clinical practice will optimise therapeutic benefits and minimise adverse events by accounting for patient-specific biology.
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.