ReviewMolecular biology reports2026
Modeling human neurodegenerative disorders in Drosophila: strategies and translational opportunities.
Review in Molecular biology reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- A Landscape ofBiology · 2026Review
- Polycomb Group Proteins inBiology · 2026Review
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drosophila melanogaster provides a genetically tractable and evolutionarily conserved platform for interrogating mechanisms of human neurodegeneration. This revised review critically evaluates how transgenic and genome-edited fly models expressing amyloid-beta, tau, alpha-synuclein, mutant huntingtin, and patient-relevant variants reproduce selective aspects of Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and polyglutamine disorders, while also highlighting the boundaries of translational inference. We emphasize conserved pathogenic modules, including oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired proteostasis, and stress signaling through Nrf2, JNK, and PINK1/Parkin, and distinguish robust mechanistic insights from findings that are primarily descriptive or overexpression-driven. We further discuss the specific contribution of Drosophila genetic tools such as GAL4/UAS, RNA interference, CRISPR-Cas9, and FLP/FRT-based mosaic analysis for dissecting cell-autonomous and non-cell-autonomous neurotoxicity. To improve usability, the manuscript now summarizes major disease models and natural compounds in dedicated tables, expands therapeutic discussion to include HDAC inhibitors and mitochondria/redox-directed small molecules, and outlines how fly studies can function within translational pipelines for variant interpretation, target prioritization, and preclinical triage before mammalian validation and human trials. Finally, we address key limitations of Drosophila relative to humans, including differences in metabolism, blood-brain barrier properties, immune complexity, and disease timescale, to provide a more balanced framework for using fly neurodegeneration models in precision medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42118343What 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.