Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34064302›Full record

ReviewPharmaceutics2021

Challenge in the Discovery of New Drugs: Antimicrobial Peptides against WHO-List of Critical and High-Priority Bacteria.

Cesar Augusto Roque-Borda, Patricia Bento da Silva, Mosar Corrêa Rodrigues, Ricardo Bentes Azevedo, Leonardo Di Filippo, Jonatas L Duarte, Marlus Chorilli, Eduardo Festozo Vicente, Fernando Rogério Pavan

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cesar Augusto Roque-BordaTuberculosis Research Laboratory, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 14800-903, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9262-0383
Patricia Bento da SilvaLaboratory of Nanobiotechnology, Department of Genetics and Morphology, Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brasilia 70910-900, Brazil.
Mosar Corrêa RodriguesLaboratory of Nanobiotechnology, Department of Genetics and Morphology, Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brasilia 70910-900, Brazil.
Ricardo Bentes AzevedoLaboratory of Nanobiotechnology, Department of Genetics and Morphology, Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brasilia 70910-900, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-2137-9588
Leonardo Di FilippoDepartment of Drugs and Medicines, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 14800-903, Brazil.
Jonatas L DuarteDepartment of Drugs and Medicines, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 14800-903, Brazil.
Marlus ChorilliDepartment of Drugs and Medicines, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 14800-903, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6698-0545
Eduardo Festozo VicenteSchool of Sciences and Engineering, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Tupã 17602-496, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9154-3574
Fernando Rogério PavanTuberculosis Research Laboratory, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 14800-903, Brazil.
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRUniversidade de Brasília · BR

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 429139/2018-7, 404181/2019-8 and 303603/2018-6Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 001Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2020/13497-4 and 2018/25707-3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial resistance has intensified in recent years due to the uncontrolled use of conventional drugs, and new bacterial strains with multiple resistance have been reported. This problem may be solved by using antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), which fulfill their bactericidal activity without developing much bacterial resistance. The rapid interaction between AMPs and the bacterial cell membrane means that the bacteria cannot easily develop resistance mechanisms. In addition, various drugs for clinical use have lost their effect as a conventional treatment; however, the synergistic effect of AMPs with these drugs would help to reactivate and enhance antimicrobial activity. Their efficiency against multi-resistant and extensively resistant bacteria has positioned them as promising molecules to replace or improve conventional drugs. In this review, we examined the importance of antimicrobial peptides and their successful activity against critical and high-priority bacteria published in the WHO list.

Indexed as

AMPsantibacterial activitycritical-priority bacteriahigh-priority bacteriaMDRXDR

Identifiers

PMID34064302
PMCPMC8224320
OpenAlexW3164944612

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.