ReviewJournal of microbiology and biotechnology2026
Reframing Antimicrobial Peptides beyond Direct Antimicrobial Activity toward Host-Directed Functions and Disease-Specific Therapeutic Applications.
Review in Journal of microbiology and biotechnology, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have been extensively investigated as alternatives to conventional antibiotics to combat multidrug-resistant bacteria. This narrow antibiotic-replacement framework underestimates the biological and translational potential of AMPs. The present review reframes them as disease-context-dependent therapeutic platforms rather than universal antibiotic substitutes. In particular, this review critically examines their microbiological basis, mechanisms of action, emerging applications, engineering strategies, formulation approaches, translational limitations, and criteria for translational development. AMPs exert diverse activities at the host-microbe interface. These effects include direct antimicrobial activity, membrane perturbation, intracellular targeting, antibiofilm effects, endotoxin neutralization, immunomodulation, and tissue repair. Hence, these multifunctional properties support their potential as therapeutic candidates for chronic wounds, biofilm-associated infections, device-related infections, mucosal and respiratory disorders, and inflammation-associated disorders. Furthermore, recent advances in peptide engineering, artificial intelligence-guided design, and delivery technologies, including nanocarriers, hydrogels, and surface immobilization, have expanded the design space and translational opportunities for AMPs. Major translational barriers remain, including cytotoxicity, hemolysis, proteolytic instability, resistance selection and cross-resistance, limited pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characterization, manufacturing costs, scale-up challenges, and uncertain clinical positioning. Overall, AMPs should be developed through a translational decision matrix that integrates mechanism, microbial susceptibility, host response, formulation, safety, and disease-relevant efficacy rather than through antimicrobial potency ranking alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.