ReviewFrontiers in molecular neuroscience2026
Tanshinone IIA and sodium tanshinone IIA sulfonate in ischemic stroke: evidence, exposure, and translational readiness.
Review in Frontiers in molecular neuroscience, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ischemic stroke remains a major cause of death and long-term disability despite reperfusion therapy. Tanshinone IIA (Tan IIA), a lipophilic diterpene quinone, and sodium tanshinone IIA sulfonate (STS), its water-soluble sulfonated derivative, show broad activity in experimental cerebral ischemia. They are often treated as interchangeable despite differences in formulation and exposure. We critically reviewed representative pharmacological, preclinical, formulation, and clinical evidence through 28 July 2026. We distinguished active entity, formulation, causal support, replication, exposure linkage, treatment window, and patient-centered relevance. Reported effects span oxidative and mitochondrial injury, endothelial barrier failure, neuroinflammation, regulated cell death, metabolism, and repair. Most pathway claims, however, rely on single laboratories, early dosing, young healthy rodents, short follow-up, or surrogate outcomes. Human evidence comprises one 42-patient STS-plus-rt-PA trial and a 2025 meta-analysis of 22 trials involving 2,289 participants. These findings suggest short-term signals but do not establish benefits for ordinal disability, survival, recurrent stroke, or uncommon bleeding. An injectable product and human plasma pharmacokinetic methods make STS more operationally tractable; superior efficacy remains unproven. Progression should require a fixed product, exposure-linked target engagement, durable benefit in aged and comorbid reperfusion models, and independent multicenter validation. Biological plausibility remains substantially stronger than translational readiness.
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.