ReviewMolecular biology reports2026
Why does siRNA delivery still fail in neurodegenerative diseases? Biological barriers, nanocarrier engineering, and future translational directions.
Review in Molecular biology reports, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurodegenerative diseases remain largely untreatable at the disease-modifying level, with currently approved therapies providing primarily symptomatic benefits. Small interfering RNA (siRNA) has emerged as a promising therapeutic modality because of its ability to selectively silence disease-associated genes. However, a major obstacle to clinical translation is not the gene-silencing mechanism itself, but the efficient delivery of therapeutic siRNAs to target cells within the central nervous system.This review examines the barriers that limit siRNA-based therapies for neurodegenerative diseases. We adopt a barrier-oriented framework that follows the sequential challenges encountered during siRNA delivery, including extracellular instability, unfavorable pharmacokinetics, immune recognition, limited transport across the blood-brain barrier, inefficient cellular internalization, and endosomal entrapment. Rather than cataloguing available delivery systems, we evaluate how nanocarrier engineering strategies have been developed to address these barriers and assess their impact on delivery. Evidence from Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and Huntington's disease is synthesized to distinguish shared limitations from disease-specific challenges and to evaluate the translational performance of lipid-based nanoparticles, polymeric nanocarriers, engineered exosomes, and hybrid platforms.Available evidence indicates that delivery platforms can improve specific aspects of siRNA transport but have not consistently overcome the sequential biological barriers required for therapy. Although nanocarrier engineering has enhanced siRNA stability, brain targeting, intracellular trafficking, and gene-silencing efficiency in preclinical models, manufacturing scalability, biological heterogeneity, long-term safety, reproducibility, and regulatory feasibility remain important barriers to clinical translation. Future progress will likely depend on delivery systems that integrate effective brain transport, endosomal escape, controlled intracellular release, and scalable manufacturing within clinical platforms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42886392What 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.