Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33495702›Full record

ReviewBiophysical reviews2021

Molecular engineering of antimicrobial peptides: microbial targets, peptide motifs and translation opportunities.

Priscila Cardoso, Hugh Glossop, Thomas G Meikle, Arturo Aburto-Medina, Charlotte E Conn, Vijayalekshmi Sarojini, Celine Valery

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biophysical reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Designing of a novel chimeric antimicrobial peptide againstResearch in pharmaceutical sciences · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

2 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

7 authors.

Priscila CardosoSchool of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
Hugh GlossopSchool of Chemical Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Thomas G MeikleSchool of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
Arturo Aburto-MedinaSchool of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
Charlotte E ConnSchool of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
Vijayalekshmi SarojiniSchool of Chemical Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Celine ValerySchool of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4724-3651

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The global public health threat of antimicrobial resistance has led the scientific community to highly engage into research on alternative strategies to the traditional small molecule therapeutics. Here, we review one of the most popular alternatives amongst basic and applied research scientists, synthetic antimicrobial peptides. The ease of peptide chemical synthesis combined with emerging engineering principles and potent broad-spectrum activity, including against multidrug-resistant strains, has motivated intense scientific focus on these compounds for the past decade. This global effort has resulted in significant advances in our understanding of peptide antimicrobial activity at the molecular scale. Recent evidence of molecular targets other than the microbial lipid membrane, and efforts towards consensus antimicrobial peptide motifs, have supported the rise of molecular engineering approaches and design tools, including machine learning. Beyond molecular concepts, supramolecular chemistry has been lately added to the debate; and helped unravel the impact of peptide self-assembly on activity, including on biofilms and secondary targets, while providing new directions in pharmaceutical formulation through taking advantage of peptide self-assembled nanostructures. We argue that these basic research advances constitute a solid basis for promising industry translation of rationally designed synthetic peptide antimicrobials, not only as novel drugs against multidrug-resistant strains but also as components of emerging antimicrobial biomaterials. This perspective is supported by recent developments of innovative peptide-based and peptide-carrier nanobiomaterials that we also review.

Indexed as

Antimicrobial peptidesAntimicrobial resistanceBiomaterialsMolecular engineeringMolecular self-assemblyNanotechnologyPeptide-target interactions

Identifiers

PMID33495702
PMCPMC7817352

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.