ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Targeting the secretory autophagy-extracellular vesicle interface: fate decisions and translational opportunities.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Autophagy preserves cellular homeostasis through lysosomal degradation, but its machinery also participates in extracellular release. This creates a pharmacological problem: changing autophagy or extracellular vesicle (EV) output can alter intracellular disposal, inflammatory signaling and communication between cells in different directions. This Review distinguishes lysosomal degradation, direct secretory autophagy and EV-associated release, with particular attention to cargo selection, tethering, fusion and the limits of route assignment. We define secretory autophagy during lysosome inhibition as a stress-dependent response and distinguish it from regulated secretion in physiological settings. Disease comparisons across cancer, neurodegeneration, inflammation and infection show why the source cell, cargo and recipient response matter for intervention. We evaluate three strategies: restoring degradation, suppressing harmful secretion and preserving or exploiting EV-linked communication. For representative interventions, we separate pharmacological tools from genetic candidate targets and pathway-level effects, and compare functional evidence, risks and translational maturity. Dynamic imaging, single-EV profiling and orthogonal perturbations offer complementary approaches to test route-specific effects. Current evidence supports preclinical opportunities, but does not establish clinical efficacy through a specifically validated secretory-autophagy-EV mechanism.
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.