Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,150

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The value of antimicrobial peptides in the age of resistance

Magana, Maria, Pushpanathan, Muthuirulan, Santos, Ana L, Leanse, Leon, Fernandez, Michael, Ioannidis, Anastasios, Giulianotti, Marc A, Apidianakis, Yiorgos, Bradfute, Steven, Ferguson, Andrew L, Cherkasov, Artem, Seleem, Mohamed N, Pinilla, Clemencia, de la Fuente-Nunez, Cesar, Lazaridis, Themis, Dai, Tianhong, Houghten, Richard A, Hancock, Robert E W, Tegos, George P·2020·The Lancet Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Accelerating growth and global expansion of antimicrobial resistance has deepened the need for discovery of novel antimicrobial agents. Antimicrobial peptides have clear advantages over conventional antibiotics which include slower emergence of resistance, broad-spectrum antibiofilm activity, and the ability to favourably modulate the host immune response. Broad bacterial susceptibility to antimicrobial peptides offers an additional tool to expand knowledge about the evolution of antimicrobial resistance. Structural and functional limitations, combined with a stricter regulatory environment, have hampered the clinical translation of antimicrobial peptides as potential therapeutic agents. Existing computational and experimental tools attempt to ease the preclinical and clinical development of antimicrobial peptides as novel therapeutics. This Review identifies the benefits, challenges, and opportunities of using antimicrobial peptides against multidrug-resistant pathogens, highlights advances in the deployment of novel promising antimicrobial peptides, and underlines the needs and priorities in designing focused development strategies taking into account the most advanced tools available.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30327-3

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 1,150

Metadata

Authors
Magana, M., Pushpanathan, M., Santos, A. L., Leanse, L., Fernandez, M., Ioannidis, A., Giulianotti, M. A., Apidianakis, Y., Bradfute, S., Ferguson, A. L., Cherkasov, A., Seleem, M. N., Pinilla, C., de la Fuente-Nunez, C., Lazaridis, T., Dai, T., Houghten, R. A., Hancock, R. E. W., & Tegos, G. P.
Venue
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
20
Issue
9
Pages
e216-e230
ISSN
1473-3099 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3040996852
Cited by
1,150
References
7
FWCI
76.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The value of antimicrobial peptides in the age of resistance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30327-3
The paper
Magana, M., Pushpanathan, M., Santos, A. L., Leanse, L., Fernandez, M., Ioannidis, A., Giulianotti, M. A., Apidianakis, Y., Bradfute, S., Ferguson, A. L., Cherkasov, A., Seleem, M. N., Pinilla, C., de la Fuente-Nunez, C., Lazaridis, T., Dai, T., Houghten, R. A., Hancock, R. E. W., & Tegos, G. P. (2020). The value of antimicrobial peptides in the age of resistance. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30327-3

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.