Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38899281›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2024

Antifungal pipeline: Is there light at the end of the tunnel?

Georgios Schinas, Nikolaos Spernovasilis, Karolina Akinosoglou

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

3 authors.

Georgios SchinasDepartment of Medicine, University of Patras, Patras 26504, Greece.
Nikolaos SpernovasilisDepartment of Infectious Diseases, German Oncology Center, Limassol 4108, Cyprus. nikspe@hotmail.com.
Karolina AkinosoglouDepartment of Medicine, University of Patras, Patras 26504, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The misuse and overuse of classic antifungals have accelerated the development of resistance mechanisms, diminishing the efficacy of established therapeutic pathways and necessitating a shift towards alternative targets. Despite this pressing need for new treatments, the antifungal drug pipeline has been largely stagnant for the past three decades, primarily due to the high risks and costs associated with antifungal drug development, compounded by uncertain market returns. Extensive research durations, special patient populations and rigorous regulatory demands pose significant barriers to bringing novel antifungal agents to market. In response, the "push-pull" incentive model has emerged as a vital strategy to invigorate the pipeline and encourage innovation. This editorial critically examines the current clinical landscape and spotlights emerging antifungal agents, such as Fosmanogepix, Ibrexafungerp, and Olorofim, while also unraveling the multifaceted challenges faced in new antifungal drug development. The generation of novel antifungals offers a beacon of hope in the battle against antimicrobial resistance, but it is premature to declare them as definitive solutions. Their future role hinges on thorough clinical validation, cost-effectiveness assessments, and continuous post-marketing surveillance. Only through strategic implementation and integration with market strategies we can transform the landscape of antifungal development, addressing both the resistance crisis and the treatment challenges.

Indexed as

AntifungalsFosmanogepixIbrexafungerpOlorofimResistance

Identifiers

PMID38899281
PMCPMC11185321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.