ArticlePloS one2021
Assessment of in vitro activities of novel modified antimicrobial peptides against clarithromycin resistant Mycobacterium abscessus.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drug Discovery Strategies for Kallikrein-Related Peptidases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Current Advances in Developing New Antimicrobial Agents Against Non-TuberculousAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Potency of all-D amino acid antimicrobial peptides derived from the bovine rumen microbiome on tuberculous and non-tuberculous mycobacteria.Current research in microbial sciences · 2025Article
- Promising antibacterial efficacy of arenicin peptides against the emerging opportunistic pathogen Mycobacterium abscessus.Journal of biomedical science · 2024Article
- Design of a novel analogue peptide with potent antibiofilm activities against Staphylococcus aureus based upon a sapecin B-derived peptide.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Tackling Nontuberculous Mycobacteria by Repurposable Drugs and Potential Leads from Natural Products.Current topics in medicinal chemistry · 2024Review
- Alternatives to Antibiotics againstAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mycobacterium abscessus (Mab) is one of the most drug resistant bacteria with a high treatment failure rate. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are alternative therapeutic agents against this infection. This study was aimed to assess the in vitro activities of thirteen AMPs (S5, S52, S6, S61, S62, S63, KLK, KLK1, KLK2, Pug-1, Pug-2, Pug-3 and Pug-4) that have never been investigated against drug resistant Mab isolates. Only four novel modified AMPs (S61, S62, S63 and KLK1) provided the lowest minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values ranging from 200-400 μg/ml against the Mab ATCC19977 strain. These four potential AMPs were further tested with 16 clinical isolates of clarithromycin resistant Mab. The majority of the tested strains (10/16 isolates, 62.5%) showed ~99% kill by all four AMPs within 24 hours with an MIC <50 μg/ml. Only two isolates (12.5%) with acquired clarithromycin resistance, however, exhibited values <50 μg/ml of four potential AMPs, S61, S62, S63 and KLK1 after 3-days-incubation. At the MICs level, S63 showed the lowest toxicity with 1.50% hemolysis and 100% PBMC viability whereas KLK1 showed the highest hemolysis (10.21%) and lowest PBMC viability (93.52%). S61, S62 and S63 were further tested with clarithromycin-AMP interaction assays and found that 5/10 (50%) of selected isolates exhibited a synergistic interaction with 0.02-0.41 FICI values. This present study demonstrated the potential application of novel AMPs as an adjunctive treatment with clarithromycin against drug resistant Mab infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.