Trial reportJournal of diabetes2026
Effect of Topical Application of Antimicrobial Peptide PL-5 (Peceleganan) Spray on Mild to Moderate Infection of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Journal of diabetes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antimicrobial Peptides for Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Infections: Current Evidence and Translational Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of topical antimicrobial peptide PL-5 (Peceleganan) spray combined with standard debridement in the treatment of mildly to moderately infected diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in four tertiary hospitals. Eligible patients were randomized to PL-5 spray or placebo, both receiving standardized debridement. The primary endpoint was clinical response rate at 1 day after end of treatment (EOT1).
resultsBaseline characteristics were balanced between groups. The clinical response rate at EOT1 was significantly higher in the PL-5 group than in the placebo group (p < 0.05). The clearance rate of drug-resistant bacteria at EOT1 was 71.43% in the PL-5 group versus 50% in the control group (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed in overall microbiological eradication rates at EOT1 (57.89% vs. 33.33%) or EOT7 (64.71% vs. 40.00%) (both p > 0.05). Adverse event rates were 24.24% in the PL-5 group and 33.33% in the placebo group (p > 0.05), with no serious drug-related adverse events. PL-5 showed a significant improvement in clinical effective rate, but overall microbiological eradication was not significantly different between groups. However, in the subset of patients with drug-resistant bacteria, PL-5 demonstrated a significantly higher clearance rate, suggesting potential for treatment of resistant infections.
conclusionsTopical PL-5 spray improves clinical outcomes in mild-to-moderate infected diabetic foot ulcers and achieves superior pathogen clearance among drug-resistant infection subgroups. It represents a promising low-resistance topical option for managing mild to moderate DFU infections.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR2300068632.
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.