Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24646082›Full record

ReviewUpsala journal of medical sciences2014

Discovery and preclinical development of new antibiotics.

Diarmaid Hughes, Anders Karlén

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Upsala journal of medical sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing 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

59 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Crystallographic fragment screen of the c-di-AMP-synthesizing enzyme CdaA from Bacillus subtilis.Acta crystallographica. Section F, Structural biology communications · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

2 authors.

Diarmaid HughesDepartment of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Biomedical Center, Box 582, Uppsala University , Uppsala , Sweden.
Anders Karlén

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibiotics are the medical wonder of our age, but an increasing frequency of resistance among key pathogens is rendering them less effective. If this trend continues the consequences for cancer patients, organ transplant patients, and indeed the general community could be disastrous. The problem is complex, involving abuse and overuse of antibiotics (selecting for an increasing frequency of resistant bacteria), together with a lack of investment in discovery and development (resulting in an almost dry drug development pipeline). Remedial approaches to the problem should include taking measures to reduce the selective pressures for resistance development, and taking measures to incentivize renewed investment in antibiotic discovery and development. Bringing new antibiotics to the clinic is critical because this is currently the only realistic therapy that can ensure the level of infection control required for many medical procedures. Here we outline the complex process involved in taking a potential novel antibiotic from the initial discovery of a hit molecule, through lead and candidate drug development, up to its entry into phase I clinical trials. The stringent criteria that a successful drug must meet, balancing high efficacy in vivo against a broad spectrum of pathogens, with minimal liabilities against human targets, explain why even with sufficient investment this process is prone to a high failure rate. This emphasizes the need to create a well-funded antibiotic discovery and development pipeline that can sustain the continuous delivery of novel candidate drugs into clinical trials, to ensure the maintenance of the advanced medical procedures we currently take for granted.

Indexed as

Drug DiscoveryAnti-Bacterial AgentsDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalMicrobial Sensitivity TestsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCandidate drugefficacyhit moleculelead moleculeliability testingmedicinal chemistry

Identifiers

PMID24646082
PMCPMC4034554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.