Correspondence | Published:

Drug screening

Don't discount all curcumin trial data

Nature volume 543, page 40 (02 March 2017) | Download Citation

We argue that the clinical potential of the spice extract curcumin should not be dismissed simply on the grounds that it yields confusing results in molecular drug screens (Nature 541, 144–145; 2017; see also K. M. Nelson et al. J. Med. Chem.; 2017).

Nelson and colleagues claim a lack of evidence for curcumin's therapeutic benefits “despite thousands of research papers and more than 120 clinical trials” ( However, a PubMed search under 'curcumin double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial' yields 49 entries, of which 17 recent trials show efficacy. In addition, there are 27 other clinical trials and at least 5 animal studies of curcumin that point to therapeutic benefits (see full reference list in Supplementary information).

The assumption that a drug candidate must have a single known target and compatibility with high-throughput screening to enter the clinic can preclude promising drug candidates (R. L. Elliott Am. Chem. Soc. Med. Chem. Lett. 3, 688–690; 2012). Current detection methods for target engagement cannot gauge the full pharmacological spectrum of an investigational drug, so should be used with other screening paradigms. Also, the binding behaviour of curcumin to multiple molecular targets is associated with modulation rather than outright inhibition. And high-throughput screening is prone to technical artefacts that can make it a deceptive arbiter for excluding potential drugs.

In light of these considerations, curcumin's molecular targets and their regulatory mechanisms warrant further investigation if we are to build on the promising results that are already to hand in humans and animals.

Author information

Author notes

    • Michal Heger

    *On behalf of 13 correspondents (see Supplementary information for full list).


  1. University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

    • Michal Heger


  1. Search for Michal Heger in:

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michal Heger.

Supplementary information

About this article

Publication history



Further reading


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Newsletter Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing