Study record
Mitochondrial Open Reading Frame of the 12S rRNA Type-c: Potential Therapeutic Candidate in Retinal Diseases
Mohtashami Z, Singh MK, Neto FT et al. · Antioxidants (Basel) · 2023
What this study reported
Reviewed reported links between MOTS-c, mitochondrial damage and age-related retinal degeneration, summarising cell studies in which MOTS-c was reported to reduce markers of oxidative stress in retinal pigment epithelial cells. Described proposed roles for MOTS-c in the retina in relation to glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy and age-related macular degeneration as a research direction rather than an established finding.
Limitations
Narrative review with no stated search strategy or quality appraisal; the retinal evidence summarised is largely in vitro and the review's framing of treatment potential is not supported by any clinical data it cites.
Study record
| Study model | Review |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | SeveralMore than one of these is central to the paper (common for reviews). |
| Species | Not reported |
| System studied | Published literature on MOTS-c, mitochondrial dysfunction and age-related retinal disease |
| Population | Not reported |
| Design | Narrative review |
| Sample size as reported | Not reported |
| Control group | Not reported |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | adaptive stress response and cellular homeostasis; oxidative stress in retinal pigment epithelium; cellular senescence in retinal disease |
| Pathways measured | Oxidative stress · NRF2 / antioxidant response |
| Research areas | Nervous system · Aging |
| Evidence tier | R — Review (context, not evidence) |
| Publication types | Journal Article, Review |
Appraisal
Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.
- Relevance to MOTS-c
- Direct
- Model applicability
- n/a
- Sample size
- n/a
- Controls
- n/a
- Outcome validity
- n/a
- Support for its own conclusion
- Weak
Provenance
- Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
- Annotated from the published abstract.
- Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
- Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.