Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24101917›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2013

From antimicrobial to anticancer peptides. A review.

Diana Gaspar, A Salomé Veiga, Miguel A R B Castanho

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 308 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
308citing papers in PubMed
31.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

308 citing papers in PubMed, 728 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Enhanced anticancer efficacy ofMaterials today. Bio · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Pep5-Cpp, a Cyclin D2-Derived Antimicrobial.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

248 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Diana GasparInstituto de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa Lisbon, Portugal.
A Salomé Veiga
Miguel A R B Castanho
University of Lisbon · PTUniversidade Católica de Brasília · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are part of the innate immune defense mechanism of many organisms. Although AMPs have been essentially studied and developed as potential alternatives for fighting infectious diseases, their use as anticancer peptides (ACPs) in cancer therapy either alone or in combination with other conventional drugs has been regarded as a therapeutic strategy to explore. As human cancer remains a cause of high morbidity and mortality worldwide, an urgent need of new, selective, and more efficient drugs is evident. Even though ACPs are expected to be selective toward tumor cells without impairing the normal body physiological functions, the development of a selective ACP has been a challenge. It is not yet possible to predict antitumor activity based on ACPs structures. ACPs are unique molecules when compared to the actual chemotherapeutic arsenal available for cancer treatment and display a variety of modes of action which in some types of cancer seem to co-exist. Regardless the debate surrounding the definition of structure-activity relationships for ACPs, great effort has been invested in ACP design and the challenge of improving effective killing of tumor cells remains. As detailed studies on ACPs mechanisms of action are crucial for optimizing drug development, in this review we provide an overview of the literature concerning peptides' structure, modes of action, selectivity, and efficacy and also summarize some of the many ACPs studied and/or developed for targeting different solid and hematologic malignancies with special emphasis on the first group. Strategies described for drug development and for increasing peptide selectivity toward specific cells while reducing toxicity are also discussed.

Indexed as

anticancer peptidesapoptosis inductiondrug developmentelectrostatic interactionsmembrane disruptionnecrosistumor selectivity

Identifiers

PMID24101917
PMCPMC3787199
OpenAlexW2153099927

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.