ReviewMini reviews in medicinal chemistry2025
Review in Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Potential medical applicability of N-β-Ala and N-His dipeptidomimetics against breast cancer: short in vitro and in silico screening.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Redefining Therapies for Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis: Synergistic Effects of Antimicrobial Peptides, Nanotechnology, and Computational Design.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Molecular Diversity, Structure-Function Relationship, Mechanism of Action, and Transformative Potential of Black Soldier Fly Antimicrobial Peptides Against Multidrug-Resistant Pathogens.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The broad-spectrum action and capacity to target drug-resistant infections make synthetic Antimicrobial Peptides (AMPs) popular therapeutic agents. Indeed, the effective use of these peptides in clinical application relies on a thorough understanding of their Pharmacokinetic (PK) and ADMET (Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, Excretion, and Toxicity) characteristics. Despite growing research on synthetic AMPs, there is a notable gap in the literature specifically addressing their ADMET profiles. Previous reviews have not extensively covered this area, providing a vital opportunity to study synthetic AMPs' pharmacokinetics and safety, which are crucial for their therapeutic development. This review covered research studies that focused on PK and ADMET of synthetic antimicrobial peptides from several databases, including Google Scholar, SCOPUS, PubMed, and Science Direct, within the years 2020 to 2024, and 12 related research papers have been found. AMPs display a wide range of PK behaviors, including rapid renal clearance, liver-centric distribution, broad distribution with low toxicity, high kidney retention, and gradual absorption with dose-dependent toxicity. Overall, the ADMET profiles of AMPs are crucial in assessing their therapeutic potential, and continuous study is necessary to enhance their practical feasibility. An in-depth investigation of the in vivo ADMET and pharmacokinetic profiles of synthetic AMPs is presented in this review to address the current gap in the research. The findings of this study provide important insights for developing synthetic AMPs as effective antimicrobial drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39950486What 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.