ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2024
Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial Peptides for Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Infections: Current Evidence and Translational Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Transcriptomic and Molecular Insights into the Response of Multidrug-Resistant Helicobacter pylori to Human Neutrophil Peptide 1 (HNP-1).Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
- Defensins as natural antimicrobial peptide scaffolds against antimicrobial-resistant pathogens: mechanisms, resistance risks, and translational prospects.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- Combating Bacterial Infections with Vitamin D-Induced Antimicrobial Peptides.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Scalable recombinant production of bioactive human neutrophil peptide-1 in Komagataella phaffii.AMB Express · 2025Article
- Human Defensins: Structure, Function, and Potential as Therapeutic Antimicrobial Agents with Highlights Against SARS CoV-2.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The use of immune compounds as antimicrobial adjuvants is a classic idea recovering timeliness in the current antibiotic resistance scenario. However, the activity of certain antimicrobial peptides against ESKAPE Gram-negatives has not been sufficiently investigated. The objective of this study was to determine the activities of human defensins HNP-1 and hBD-3 alone or combined with permeabilizing/peptidoglycan-targeting agents against clinical ESKAPE Gram-negatives [ IMPORTANCE: In the current scenario of critical need for new antimicrobials against multidrug-resistant bacteria, all options must be considered, including classic ideas such as the use of purified immune compounds. However, information regarding the activity of certain human defensins against ESKAPE Gram-negatives was incomplete. This is the first study comparatively assessing the in vitro activity of two membrane-permeabilizing/peptidoglycan construction-blocking defensins (HNP-1 and hBD-3) against relevant clinical collections of ESKAPE Gram-negatives, alone or in combination with permeabilizers, additional peptidoglycan-targeting attacks, or the blockade of its recycling. Our data suggest that hBD-3 has a notable bactericidal activity against multidrug-resistant
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.