ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2025
Preclinical evaluation of repositioned non-antibiotic agents against Staphylococcus aureus: a network meta-analysis of survival outcomes.
Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The 5% Problem: How the Biomedical Community Responded to the Animal-to-Human Translation Crisis, and the Case for Non-Animal Methods.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Staphylococcus aureus is a major global health threat due to its increasing antibiotic resistance. The urgent need for alternative treatments has spurred interest in drug repositioning. Drug repositioning the application of approved non-antibiotic agents for new therapeutic uses offers a time-efficient and cost-effective route to identifying novel anti-infective strategies. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of repositioned bioactive agents in treating S. aureus infections by comparing survival outcomes in preclinical animal models. Following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we included in vivo animal models of S. aureus evaluating repositioned non-antibiotic bioactive agents, reporting available survival assay data, with at least one comparator (placebo and/or standard antibiotics). Studies lacking the required data are excluded. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using the SYRCLE tool. A random effects model was employed to compare bioactive agent effectiveness, with results presented as risk differences and ranked using P-scores. Ultimately, 17 eligible studies were selected from 8594 screened records. The majority of the studies (88.2%) used mice, with intraperitoneal infection models (41.1%) and anticancer agent categories (23.5%) being the most common. Several repositioned drugs showed significantly better survival rates compared to the negative control. Moreover, none of the treatments significantly outperformed the positive controls. Our analysis found that, compared to the negative and positive controls, oral FdUrd and isopropoxy benzene guanidine had the highest P-scores (0.98 and 0.9, respectively). These findings support the continued exploration of non-antibiotic repurposing strategies as viable adjuncts or alternatives in managing drug-resistant S. aureus infections, with implications for translational and formulation development in antimicrobial drug delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41307771What 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.