Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25591121›Full record

ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2015

Pro-moieties of antimicrobial peptide prodrugs.

Eanna Forde, Marc Devocelle

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. PEGylated Oligothioetheramide Prodrugs Activated by Host Serum Proteases.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Synergies with and Resistance to Membrane-Active Peptides.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Antibiotic resistance: a rundown of a global crisis.Infection and drug resistance · 2018
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Antimicrobial peptides in 2014.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2015
    Review
  19. 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.

Eanna FordeDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin 9, Ireland. eannaforde@rcsi.ie.
Marc DevocelleCentre for Synthesis and Chemical Biology, Department of Pharmaceutical and Medicinal Chemistry, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St. Stephen's Green, Dublin 2, Ireland. marcdevocelle@rcsi.ie.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are a promising class of antimicrobial agents that have been garnering increasing attention as resistance renders many conventional antibiotics ineffective. Extensive research has resulted in a large library of highly-active AMPs. However, several issues serve as an impediment to their clinical development, not least the issue of host toxicity. An approach that may allow otherwise cytotoxic AMPs to be used is to deliver them as a prodrug, targeting antimicrobial activity and limiting toxic effects on the host. The varied library of AMPs is complemented by a selection of different possible pro-moieties, each with their own characteristics. This review deals with the different pro-moieties that have been used with AMPs and discusses the merits of each.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective AgentsPeptidesProdrugsAnti-Infective AgentsPeptidesProdrugs

Identifiers

PMID25591121
PMCPMC6272668

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.