ArticleScientific reports2023
Bee venom as an alternative for antibiotics against Staphylococcus aureus infections.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Synthesis and characterization of honey bee venom-loaded calcium oxide nanocomposites and evaluation of their cytotoxic (MCF-7) and antifungal activity.Discover nano · 2025Article
- Therapeutic Effects of Nanocoating of Apitoxin (Bee Venom) and Polyvinyl Alcohol Supplemented with Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The misuse of antibiotics has led to antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains, making it even harder to combat and eliminate their infections. Staphylococcus aureus causes various adverse infections and diseases, including skin abscesses, bloodstream infections, pneumonia, and joint infections. In this study, we aimed to test the cytotoxic and antibacterial effects of bee venom-loaded chitosan nanoparticles (BV-loaded CS-NPs) in comparison to gamma-irradiated BV and native BV from Apis mellifera. The physiochemical characterizations of our treatments were determined by Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR), Transmission Electron Microscope (TEM), zeta-potential, release rate, and Encapsulation Efficiency (EE). Our study was conducted on both levels, in-vitro and in-vivo. For the in-vitro study, a bacterial model of Staphylococcus aureus with an ATCC number of 6538 was grown in tryptic soy agar (TSA) medium, and the inhibition zones of our drug candidates were measured with the appropriate statistical analysis performed. For the in-vivo study, levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), Creatinine, Urea, and interleukin 6 (IL-6) were analyzed. BV-loaded CS-NPs showed relatively better results than the other alternatives, which are native BV and gamma-irradiated BV. The results showed that the antibacterial effect of BV-loaded CS-NPs was greater than the alternatives. Furthermore, its cytotoxic effect was far less than the native and irradiated bee venom. These outcomes ensure that loading BV on CS-NPs makes it a promising drug candidate for an antibiotic alternative with minimal cytotoxicity and enhanced antibacterial activity.
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.