Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 471

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The macrolide antibiotic renaissance

Open access
Dinos, George P·2017·British Journal of Pharmacology

Abstract

Macrolides represent a large family of protein synthesis inhibitors of great clinical interest due to their applicability to human medicine. Macrolides are composed of a macrocyclic lactone of different ring sizes, to which one or more deoxy‐sugar or amino sugar residues are attached. Macrolides act as antibiotics by binding to bacterial 50S ribosomal subunit and interfering with protein synthesis. The high affinity of macrolides for bacterial ribosomes, together with the highly conserved structure of ribosomes across virtually all of the bacterial species, is consistent with their broad‐spectrum activity. Since the discovery of the progenitor macrolide, erythromycin, in 1950, many derivatives have been synthesised, leading to compounds with better bioavailability and acid stability and improved pharmacokinetics. These efforts led to the second generation of macrolides, including well‐known members such as azithromycin and clarithromycin. Subsequently, in order to address increasing antibiotic resistance, a third generation of macrolides displaying improved activity against many macrolide resistant strains was developed. However, these improvements were accompanied with serious side effects, leading to disappointment and causing many researchers to stop working on macrolide derivatives, assuming that this procedure had reached the end. In contrast, a recent published breakthrough introduced a new chemical platform for synthesis and discovery of a wide range of diverse macrolide antibiotics. This chemical synthesis revolution, in combination with reduction in the side effects, namely, ‘Ketek effects’, has led to a macrolide renaissance, increasing the hope for novel and safe therapeutic agents to combat serious human infectious diseases.

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 · 10.1111/bph.13936

Cites

8 of 8 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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 8 references

Cited by

See all 471

Metadata

Authors
Dinos, G. P.
Venue
British Journal of Pharmacology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-08-10
Volume
174
Issue
18
Pages
2967-2983
ISSN
  • 0007-1188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5381
OpenAlex
W2733572144
Cited by
471
References
8
FWCI
15.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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 macrolide antibiotic renaissance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/bph.13936
The paper
Dinos, G. P. (2017). The macrolide antibiotic renaissance. British Journal of Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.13936

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.