Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21464254›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2011

Efficacy of antimicrobial peptoids against Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

Rinki Kapoor, Patrick R Eimerman, Jonathan W Hardy, Jeffrey D Cirillo, Christopher H Contag, Annelise E Barron

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Antiparasitic effect of peptoids againstMicrobiology (Reading, England) · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Frontiers in immunology · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Role of Antimicrobial Peptides in Treatment and Prevention of Mycobacterium Tuberculosis: A Review.International journal of peptide research and therapeutics · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Rinki KapoorDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Patrick R Eimerman
Jonathan W Hardy
Jeffrey D Cirillo
Christopher H Contag
Annelise E Barron

Funding

MOLECULAR BASIS OF HOST-PARASITE INTERACTIONT32AI007328 · NIAID · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI JUSTIN L SONNENBURG · 1987 to 2026
$11.9M
Mycobacterial Dissemination and PersistenceR01AI047866 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI CIRILLO, JEFFREY D. · 2002 to 2010
$2.0M
Ampetoids as Biostable Functional Mimics of Antimicrobial PeptidesR01AI072666 · NIAID · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI BARRON, ANNELISE EMILY · 2007 to 2011
$1.8M
NIAID NIH HHS 5 R01 AI072666-04NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI047866NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI072666NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007328
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tuberculosis is a leading cause of death worldwide. Resistance of Mycobacterium to antibiotics can make treatments less effective in some cases. We tested selected oligopeptoids--previously reported as mimics of natural host defense peptides--for activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosis and assessed their cytotoxicity. A tetrameric, alkylated, cationic peptoid (1-C13(4mer)) was most potent against M. tuberculosis and least cytotoxic, whereas an unalkylated analogue, peptoid 1(4mer), was inactive. Peptoid 1-C13(4mer) thus merits further study as a potential antituberculosis drug.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCell LineCell SurvivalMacrophagesMiceMycobacterium bovisMycobacterium tuberculosisPeptoidsAnti-Bacterial AgentsPeptoids

Identifiers

PMID21464254
PMCPMC3101442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.