ReviewDiscover nano2026
Antimicrobial peptides for bacterial infections and their biomedical applications.
Review in Discover nano, 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.
- RK-14: A Novel Antimicrobial Peptide Targeting Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria and Catheter-Associated Biofilms.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Due to the rapid development of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria due to the inappropriate use and misuse of antibiotics and the ineffective performance of antibiotics against refractory biofilm-associated infections (BRI), there is an urgent need for novel alternative antimicrobials and strategies to combat bacterial infections. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have attracted considerable interest due to their potent activity against MDR pathogens and biofilm-associated infections, coupled with a substantially reduced risk of driving antimicrobial resistance-especially when employed as alternatives or adjuncts to conventional antibiotics. With the development of nanocarrier-based delivery strategies, AMP nanomaterials significantly improve the therapeutic effect of AMP by improving the hydrolytic stability, in vivo half-life, solubility, and reducing cytotoxicity and hemolysis of AMP. Distinct from previous reviews that primarily focus on AMP sequence engineering or generic nanocarrier types, this work adopts a clinically oriented framework organized by infection site-including pulmonary, bloodstream, gastrointestinal, chronic wound, and implant-associated infections. Key therapeutic outcomes reported in the literature are systematically compared, such as reductions in minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), biofilm eradication efficiency, survival benefits in sepsis models, and wound closure kinetics. Formulation design strategies, administration routes, and the rational application of nanocarriers constructed from metallic elements, biocompatible polymers, and lipid-based architectures are discussed in the context of specific infectious microenvironments. By correlating the physicochemical properties of nanocarriers-such as surface charge, degradation profile, and release kinetics-with therapeutic performance across diverse infection models, this review also addresses the current limitations of AMP-based formulations in clinical applications. Overall, this review provides insights into the advantages and disadvantages of AMP-based nanomaterials currently under development for the treatment of bacterial infections in the literature, bringing inspiration and recommendations for their future design.
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.