Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26493767›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2015

Antibiotic resistance breakers: can repurposed drugs fill the antibiotic discovery void?

David Brown

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 152 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
152citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.7field-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

152 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 354 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Seasonal surveillance ofVeterinary world · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Evaluation of In Vitro Efficiency of Ciclopirox AgainstInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

David BrownAlchemy Biomedical Consulting, St Johns Innovation Centre, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WS, UK.
Seascape Consultants (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Concern over antibiotic resistance is growing, and new classes of antibiotics, particularly against Gram-negative bacteria, are needed. However, even if the scientific hurdles can be overcome, it could take decades for sufficient numbers of such antibiotics to become available. As an interim solution, antibiotic resistance could be 'broken' by co-administering appropriate non-antibiotic drugs with failing antibiotics. Several marketed drugs that do not currently have antibacterial indications can either directly kill bacteria, reduce the antibiotic minimum inhibitory concentration when used in combination with existing antibiotics and/or modulate host defence through effects on host innate immunity, in particular by altering inflammation and autophagy. This article discusses how such 'antibiotic resistance breakers' could contribute to reducing the antibiotic resistance problem, and analyses a priority list of candidates for further investigation.

Indexed as

BacteriaDrug RepositioningDrug Resistance, BacterialAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Inflammatory AgentsDrug and Narcotic ControlHumansAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Inflammatory Agents

Identifiers

PMID26493767
OpenAlexW2175741618

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.