ReviewFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026
Structural barriers to antifungal drug development.
Review in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2026. 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.
- Boron's Double Edge-Antibiotics, Toxins, and the Fine Line Between Them.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fungal diseases represent a growing yet under-recognized global health threat, with mortality comparable to major infectious diseases but a disproportionately weak therapeutic pipeline. This review examines the antifungal innovation gap as a systemic phenomenon shaped by intertwined scientific, economic, and societal constraints. While multidrug-resistant pathogens underscore the urgent need for new antifungal agents, progress is hindered by fungal-human cellular similarity, high development costs, limited commercial incentives, and toxicity concerns. Agricultural fungicide practices that drive resistance and intellectual-property regimes that restrict affordability and generic entry further complicate this landscape. These scientific and economic barriers coexist with profound inequities in global access to existing antifungals, revealing a persistent gap between therapeutic availability and public health needs. The resulting public-health consequences include delayed treatment, reliance on suboptimal therapies, and widening disparities in outcomes across low-resource settings. This review proposes that antifungal agents should be conceptualized as global public goods and that non-profit development models offer a promising pathway to overcome current bottlenecks. An integrated perspective across clinical, agricultural, regulatory, and public-health domains underscores the need for coordinated strategies to restore innovation, ensure equitable access, and strengthen global preparedness against fungal diseases.
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.