ReviewFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026
Newer antibiotics for drug-resistant Gram-negative infections in immunocompromised hosts: from pivotal trials to high-risk practice.
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. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Newer antibiotics have expanded treatment options for drug-resistant Gram-negative infections, but registration evidence is dominated by syndrome-based trials and post-approval evidence by heterogeneous observational cohorts. Translation to immunocompromised patients remains uncertain because profound neutropenia, transplantation, cell-targeted therapy, organ dysfunction, impaired source control, and limited immune-mediated clearance change both the probability and consequences of treatment failure. This critical narrative Review integrates 27 pivotal-trial protocol identifiers included in a predefined evidence map, immune-phenotype-specific cohorts, contemporary guidance, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic evidence, and treatment-emergent resistance reports for a bounded core set of newer agents first authorized in the United States or European Union between 2014 and 2025, including newer β-lactam/β-lactamase-inhibitor combinations, cefiderocol, sulbactam-durlobactam, aztreonam-avibactam, and selected non-β-lactams. Fifteen of 27 pivotal protocols explicitly excluded at least one major immune phenotype or threshold; 11 had unresolved immune-host enrollment, and one enrolled immunocompromised patients but pooled distinct immune phenotypes. None reported comparative outcomes resolved to a defined immune phenotype. Phenotype-specific post-approval evidence was concentrated in hematological malignancy/profound neutropenia and solid-organ transplantation, whereas direct treatment-outcome evidence was sparse or absent for solid tumors, cellular therapies including CAR-T, advanced HIV infection, inborn errors of immunity/primary immunodeficiencies, and pediatric immunocompromised patients. We therefore separate phenotype-specific transportability from methodological credibility rather than treating directness as an overall certainty grade. The Review then synthesizes treatment by resistance mechanism and applies a host-pathogen-drug-context framework to empirical selection, diagnostics, exposure optimization, source control, de-escalation, relapse, and resistance. The resulting evidence map supports mechanism-active therapy while making the limits of transfer auditable and defining priorities for standardized phenotype reporting and pragmatic enrollment.
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.