ArticleChemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany)2024
Structure-Activity Relationship Study to Develop Peptide Amphiphiles as Species-Specific Antimicrobials.
Article in Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany), 2024. 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.
- Interactions of Peptide Amphiphiles With Viruses and Cells Are Enabled by Amorphous Nanostructures.Journal of peptide science : an official publication of the European Peptide Society · 2025Article
- Protein-based nanoparticles for antimicrobial and cancer therapy: implications for public health.RSC advances · 2025Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Antimicrobial peptide amphiphiles (PAs) are a promising class of molecules that can disrupt the bacterial membrane or act as drug nanocarriers. In this study, we prepared 33 PAs to establish supramolecular structure-activity relationships. We studied the morphology and activity of the nanostructures against different Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial strains (such as Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii). Next, we used principal component analysis (PCA) to determine the key contributors to activity. We found that for S. aureus, the zeta potential was the major contributor to the activity while Gram-negative bacteria were more influenced by the partition coefficient (LogP) with the following order P. aeruginosa>E. coli>A. baumannii. We also performed a study of the mechanism of action of selected PAs on the bacterial membrane assessing the membrane permeability and depolarization, changes in zeta potential and overall integrity. We studied the toxicity of the nanostructures against mammalian cells. Finally, we performed an in vivo study using the wax moth larvae to determine the therapeutic efficacy of the active PAs. This study shows cationic PA nanostructures can be an intriguing platform for the development of nanoantibacterials.
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.