ReviewArchives of microbiology2026
Bacterial β-carbonic anhydrases: a six-step prioritization framework for antibacterial target validation.
Review in Archives of microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bacterial β-carbonic anhydrases (β-CAs) are actively studied as potential targets for next-generation antibacterial agents. Despite extensive biochemical and structural characterization, their validation as isoform-specific therapeutic targets remains incomplete. Here, we developed and applied a six-filter validation framework-encompassing genetic essentiality, physiological relevance, biochemical feasibility, structural rationale, cellular target engagement, and therapeutic context-to integrate disparate data into a strategic prioritization map across representative pathogens (Escherichia coli, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Streptococcus pneumoniae). Application of this framework reveals that none of the analyzed β-CA isoforms currently qualifies as a ready therapeutic candidate (Group A), with most falling into context-dependent (Group C) or high-risk (Group D) categories due to specific validation gaps. By systematically defining these gaps, the framework provides a prioritized, target-driven roadmap for future experimental design and antibacterial drug discovery targeting bacterial β-carbonic anhydrases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41806044What 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.