ArticlePloS one2026
A bioactivity-leveling approach for component-specific evaluation in natural product extracts: Optimizing SARS-CoV-2 antiviral screening by controlling for pheophorbide A.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has intensified the search for novel antiviral agents, with plants representing a promising source due to the documented antiviral properties. Pheophorbides, chlorophyll breakdown products, have been demonstrated to impede viral entry of enveloped viruses. However, the frequent occurrence of pheophorbide A in plant extracts presents a challenge for antiviral screening, as it may obscure the discovery of novel antiviral compounds. The objective of this study was therefore leveling out the influence of pheophorbide A in an in vitro virus pretreatment assay, to prioritize extracts and fractions and support the identification of additional antiviral compounds in plant extracts. Using different experimental derived examples, the limitations and advantages of the strategy presented are discussed. Assay-derived protective effects were interpreted in relation to pheophorbide A quantification, allowing six out of 15 plant species to be prioritized for further investigations. Qualitative comparison of metabolite profiles of fractions with the extent of protective effect supported the prioritization process and led to the identification of candidate compounds potentially contributing to the observed protective effect in Primula veris L. beyond pheophorbide A. Overall, the results highlight the potential value of the proposed strategy for revealing bioactivity beyond known predominant effectors and suggest an applicability in natural product-based screening approaches.
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.