Hubbry Logo
AntimicrobialAntimicrobialMain
Open search
Antimicrobial
Community hub
Antimicrobial
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Antimicrobial
Antimicrobial
Antimicrobial
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Hand sanitizer is a common consumer-level antimicrobial product

An antimicrobial is an agent that kills microorganisms (microbicide) or stops their growth (bacteriostatic agent).[1] Antimicrobial medicines can be grouped according to the microorganisms they are used to treat. For example, antibiotics are used against bacteria, and antifungals are used against fungi. They can also be classified according to their function. Antimicrobial medicines to treat infection are known as antimicrobial chemotherapy, while antimicrobial drugs are used to prevent infection, which known as antimicrobial prophylaxis.[2]

The main classes of antimicrobial agents are disinfectants (non-selective agents, such as bleach), which kill a wide range of microbes on surfaces to prevent the spread of illness, antiseptics which are applied to living tissue and help reduce infection during surgery, and antibiotics which destroy microorganisms within the body. The term antibiotic originally described only those formulations derived from living microorganisms but is now also applied to synthetic agents, such as sulfonamides or fluoroquinolones. Though the term used to be restricted to antibacterials, its context has broadened to include all antimicrobials. In response, further advancements in antimicrobial technologies have resulted in solutions that can go beyond simply inhibiting microbial growth. Instead, certain types of porous media have been developed to kill microbes on contact.[3] The misuse and overuse of antimicrobials in humans, animals and plants are the main drivers in the development of drug-resistant pathogens.[4] It is estimated that bacterial antimicrobial resistance (AMR) was directly responsible for 1.27 million global deaths in 2019 and contributed to 4.95 million deaths.[4]

History

[edit]

Antimicrobial use has been common practice for at least 2000 years. Ancient Egyptians and ancient Greeks used specific molds and plant extracts to treat infection.[5]

In the 19th century, microbiologists such as Louis Pasteur and Jules Francois Joubert observed antagonism between some bacteria and discussed the merits of controlling these interactions in medicine.[6] Louis Pasteur's work in fermentation and spontaneous generation led to the distinction between anaerobic and aerobic bacteria. The information garnered by Pasteur led Joseph Lister to incorporate antiseptic methods, such as sterilizing surgical tools and debriding wounds into surgical procedures. The implementation of these antiseptic techniques drastically reduced the number of infections and subsequent deaths associated with surgical procedures. Louis Pasteur's work in microbiology also led to the development of many vaccines for life-threatening diseases such as anthrax and rabies.[7] On September 3, 1928, Alexander Fleming returned from a vacation and discovered that a Petri dish filled with Staphylococcus was separated into colonies due to the antimicrobial fungus Penicillium rubens. Fleming and his associates struggled to isolate the antimicrobial but referenced its therapeutic potential in 1929 in the British Journal of Experimental Pathology.[8] In 1942, Howard Florey, Ernst Chain, and Edward Abraham used Fleming's work to purify and extract penicillin for medicinal uses earning them the 1945 Nobel Prize in Medicine.[9]

Chemical

[edit]
Selman Waksman, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine for developing 22 antibiotics—most notably Streptomycin

Antibacterials

[edit]
Main article: Antibiotic

Antibacterials are used to treat bacterial infections. Antibiotics are classified generally as beta-lactams, macrolides, quinolones, tetracyclines or aminoglycosides. Their classification within these categories depends on their antimicrobial spectra, pharmacodynamics and chemical composition.[10] Prolonged use of certain antibacterials can decrease the number of enteric bacteria, which may have a negative impact on health. Consumption of probiotics and healthy eating may help to replace destroyed gut flora. Stool transplants may be considered however for patients who are having difficulty recovering from prolonged antibiotic treatment, such as recurrent Clostridioides difficile infections.[11][12]

The discovery, development and use of antibacterials during the 20th century have reduced mortality from bacterial infections. The antibiotic era began with the therapeutic application of sulfonamide drugs in 1936, followed by a "golden" period of discovery from about 1945 to 1970, when a number of structurally diverse and highly effective agents were discovered and developed. Since 1980, the introduction of new antimicrobial agents for clinical use has declined, in part because of the enormous expense of developing and testing new drugs.[13] In parallel, there has been an alarming increase in antimicrobial resistance of bacteria, fungi, parasites and some viruses to multiple existing agents.[14]

Antibacterials are among the most commonly used and misused drugs by physicians, for example, in viral respiratory tract infections. As a consequence of widespread and injudicious use of antibacterials, there has been an accelerated emergence of antibiotic-resistant pathogens, resulting in a serious threat to global public health. The resistance problem demands that a renewed effort be made to seek antibacterial agents effective against pathogenic bacteria resistant to current antibacterials. Possible strategies towards this objective include increased sampling from diverse environments and application of metagenomics to identify bioactive compounds produced by currently unknown and uncultured microorganisms as well as the development of small-molecule libraries customized for bacterial targets.[15]

Antifungals

[edit]
Main article: Fungicide

Antifungals are used to kill or prevent further growth of fungi. In medicine, they are used as a treatment for infections such as athlete's foot, ringworm and thrush and work by exploiting differences between mammalian and fungal cells. Unlike bacteria, both fungi and humans are eukaryotes. Thus, fungal and human cells are similar at the molecular level, making it more difficult to find a target for an antifungal drug to attack that does not also exist in the host organism. Consequently, there are often side effects to some of these drugs. Some of these side effects can be life-threatening if the drug is not used properly.[16]

As well as their use in medicine, antifungals are frequently sought after to control indoor mold in damp or wet home materials. Sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) blasted on to surfaces acts as an antifungal. Another antifungal solution applied after or without blasting by soda is a mix of hydrogen peroxide and a thin surface coating that neutralizes mold and encapsulates the surface to prevent spore release. Some paints are also manufactured with an added antifungal agent for use in high humidity areas such as bathrooms or kitchens. Other antifungal surface treatments typically contain variants of metals known to suppress mold growth e.g. pigments or solutions containing copper, silver or zinc. These solutions are not usually available to the general public because of their toxicity.[17]

Antivirals

[edit]
Main article: Antiviral drug

Antiviral drugs are a class of medication used specifically for treating viral infections. Like antibiotics, specific antivirals are used for specific viruses. They should be distinguished from viricides, which actively deactivate virus particles outside the body.[18]

Many antiviral drugs are designed to treat infections by retroviruses, including HIV. Important antiretroviral drugs include the class of protease inhibitors. Herpes viruses, best known for causing cold sores and genital herpes, are usually treated with the nucleoside analogue acyclovir. Viral hepatitis is caused by five unrelated hepatotropic viruses (A-E) and may be treated with antiviral drugs depending on the type of infection. Some influenza A and B viruses have become resistant to neuraminidase inhibitors such as oseltamivir, and the search for new substances continues.[19]

Antiparasitics

[edit]
Main article: Antiparasitic

Antiparasitics are a class of medications indicated for the treatment of infectious diseases such as leishmaniasis, malaria and Chagas disease, which are caused by parasites such as nematodes, cestodes, trematodes and infectious protozoa. Antiparasitic medications include metronidazole, iodoquinol and albendazole.[10] Like all therapeutic antimicrobials, they must kill the infecting organism without serious damage to the host.[20]

Broad-spectrum therapeutics

[edit]
Main article: Broad-spectrum therapeutic

Broad-spectrum therapeutics are active against multiple classes of pathogens. Such therapeutics have been suggested as potential emergency treatments for pandemics.[21][better source needed]

Non-pharmaceutical

[edit]

A wide range of chemical and natural compounds are used as antimicrobials. Organic acids and their salts are used widely in food products, e.g. lactic acid, citric acid, acetic acid, either as ingredients or as disinfectants. For example, beef carcasses often are sprayed with acids, and then rinsed or steamed, to reduce the prevalence of Escherichia coli.[22]

Heavy metal cations such as Hg2+ and Pb2+ have antimicrobial activities, but can be toxic. In recent years, the antimicrobial activity of coordination compounds has been investigated.[23][24][25][26]

Traditional herbalists used plants to treat infectious disease. Many of these plants have been investigated scientifically for antimicrobial activity, and some plant products have been shown to inhibit the growth of pathogenic microorganisms.[27] A number of these agents appear to have structures and modes of action that are distinct from those of the antibiotics in current use, suggesting that cross-resistance with agents already in use may be minimal.[28]

Copper

[edit]
Main articles: Antimicrobial properties of copper and Antimicrobial copper-alloy touch surfaces

Copper-alloy surfaces have natural intrinsic antimicrobial properties and can kill microorganisms such as E. coli and Staphylococcus.[29][30] The United States Environmental Protection Agency approved the registration of antimicrobial copper alloy surfaces for use in addition to regular cleaning and disinfection to control infections.[30][31] Antimicrobial copper alloys are being installed in some healthcare facilities and subway transit systems as a public hygienic measure.[30] Copper nanoparticles are attracting interest for the intrinsic antimicrobial behaviours.[32]

Essential oils

[edit]

Many essential oils included in herbal pharmacopoeias are claimed to possess antimicrobial activity in vitro, with the oils of bay, cinnamon, clove and thyme reported to be the most potent in studies with foodborne bacterial pathogens.[33][34]

While 25 to 50% of pharmaceutical compounds are plant-derived, none are used as antimicrobials, though there has been increased research in this direction.[35] Barriers to increased usage in mainstream medicine include poor regulatory oversight and quality control, evidence only from in vitro studies, mislabeled or misidentified products, and limited modes of delivery.[36]

Antimicrobial pesticides

[edit]

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and defined by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, antimicrobial pesticides are used to control growth of microbes through disinfection, sanitation, or reduction of development and to protect inanimate objects, industrial processes or systems, surfaces, water, or other chemical substances from contamination, fouling, or deterioration caused by bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoa, algae, or slime.[37] The EPA monitors products, such as disinfectants/sanitizers for use in hospitals or homes, to ascertain efficacy.[38] Products that are meant for public health are therefore under this monitoring system, including products used for drinking water, swimming pools, food sanitation, and other environmental surfaces. These pesticide products are registered under the premise that, when used properly, they do not demonstrate unreasonable side effects to humans or the environment. Even once certain products are on the market, the EPA continues to monitor and evaluate them to make sure they maintain efficacy in protecting public health.[39]

Public health products regulated by the EPA are divided into three categories:[37]

  • Disinfectants: Destroy or inactivate microorganisms (bacteria, fungi, viruses,) but may not act as sporicides (as those are the most difficult form to destroy). According to efficacy data, the EPA will classify a disinfectant as limited, general/ broad spectrum, or as a hospital disinfectant.
  • Sanitizers: Reduce the number of microorganisms, but may not kill or eliminate all of them.
  • Sterilizers (Sporicides): Eliminate all bacteria, fungi, spores, and viruses.
Antimicrobial pesticide safety
[edit]

Antimicrobial pesticides have the potential to be a major factor in drug resistance.[40] Organizations such as the World Health Organization call for significant reduction in their use globally to combat this.[41] According to a 2010 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report, health-care workers can take steps to improve their safety measures against antimicrobial pesticide exposure. Workers are advised to minimize exposure to these agents by wearing personal protective equipment such as gloves and safety glasses. Additionally, it is important to follow the handling instructions properly, as that is how the EPA has deemed them as safe to use. Employees should be educated about the health hazards and encouraged to seek medical care if exposure occurs.[42]

Ozone

[edit]
Main article: Ozone applications

Ozone can kill microorganisms in air, water and process equipment and has been used in settings such as kitchen exhaust ventilation, garbage rooms, grease traps, biogas plants, wastewater treatment plants, textile production, breweries, dairies, food and hygiene production, pharmaceutical industries, bottling plants, zoos, municipal drinking-water systems, swimming pools and spas, and in the laundering of clothes and treatment of in–house mold and odors.[43][44]

Antimicrobial scrubs

[edit]

Antimicrobial scrubs can reduce the accumulation of odors and stains on scrubs, which in turn improves their longevity. These scrubs also come in a variety of colors and styles. As antimicrobial technology develops at a rapid pace, these scrubs are readily available, with more advanced versions hitting the market every year.[45] These bacteria could then be spread to office desks, break rooms, computers, and other shared technology. This can lead to outbreaks and infections like methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus, treatments for which cost the healthcare industry $20 billion a year.

Halogens

[edit]

Elements such as chlorine, iodine, fluorine, and bromine are nonmetallic in nature and constitute the halogen family. Each of these halogens have a different antimicrobial effect that is influenced by various factors such as pH, temperature, contact time, and type of microorganism. Chlorine and iodine are the two most commonly used antimicrobials. Chlorine is extensively used as a disinfectant in the water treatment plants, drug, and food industries. In wastewater treatment plants, chlorine is widely used as a disinfectant. It oxidizes soluble contaminants and kills bacteria and viruses. It is also highly effective against bacterial spores. The mode of action is by breaking the bonds present in these microorganisms. When a bacterial enzyme comes in contact with a compound containing chlorine, the hydrogen atom in that molecule gets displaced and is replaced with chlorine. This in turn changes the enzyme function which ultimately leads to the death of the bacterium. Iodine is most commonly used for sterilization and wound cleaning. The three major antimicrobial compounds containing iodine are alcohol-iodine solution, an aqueous solution of iodine, and iodophors. Iodophors are more bactericidal and are used as antiseptics as they are less irritating when applied to the skin. Bacterial spores on the other hand cannot be killed by iodine, but they can be inhibited by iodophors. The growth of microorganisms is inhibited when iodine penetrates into the cells and oxidizes proteins, genetic material, and fatty acids. Bromine is also an effective antimicrobial that is used in water treatment plants. When mixed with chlorine it is highly effective against bacterial spores such as S. faecalis.[46]

Alcohols

[edit]

Alcohols are commonly used as disinfectants and antiseptics. Alcohols kill vegetative bacteria, most viruses and fungi. Ethyl alcohol, n-propanol and isopropyl alcohol are the most commonly used antimicrobial agents.[47] Methanol is also a disinfecting agent but is not generally used as it is highly poisonous. Escherichia coli, Salmonella, and Staphylococcus aureus are a few bacteria whose growth can be inhibited by alcohols. Alcohols have a high efficiency against enveloped viruses (60–70% ethyl alcohol) 70% isopropyl alcohol or ethanol are highly effective as an antimicrobial agent. In the presence of water, 70% alcohol causes coagulation of the proteins thus inhibiting microbial growth. Alcohols are not quite efficient when it comes to spores. The mode of action is by denaturing the proteins. Alcohols interfere with the hydrogen bonds present in the protein structure. Alcohols also dissolve the lipid membranes that are present in microorganisms.[48][49] Disruption of the cell membrane is another property of alcohols that aids in cell death. Alcohols are cheap and effective antimicrobials. They are widely used in the pharmaceutical industry.  Alcohols are commonly used in hand sanitizers, antiseptics, and disinfectants.

Phenol

[edit]

Phenol, also known as carbolic acid, was one of the first chemicals was used as an antimicrobial agent. It has high antiseptic properties. It is bacteriostatic at concentrations of 0.1%–1% and is bactericidal and fungicidal at 1%–2%. A 5% solution kills anthrax spores in 48 hr.[50]

Phenols are most commonly used in oral mouth washes and household cleaning agents.[51] They are active against a wide range of bacteria, fungi and viruses. Phenol derivatives, such as thymol and cresol, are used because they are less toxic compared to phenol. These phenolic compounds have a benzene ring along with the –OH group incorporated into their structures. They have a higher antimicrobial activity. These compounds inhibit microbial growth by precipitating proteins which lead to their denaturation and by penetrating into the cell membrane of microorganisms and disrupting it. Hexachlorophene (bisphenol) is used as a surfactant. It is widely used in soaps, handwashes, and skin products because of its antiseptic properties. It is also used as a sterilizing agent. Cresol is an effective antimicrobial and is widely used in mouthwashes and cough drops.

Aldehydes

[edit]

Aldehydes are highly effective against bacteria, fungi, and viruses.  Aldehydes inhibit bacterial growth by disrupting the outer membrane. They are used in the disinfection and sterilization of surgical instruments. As they are highly toxic, they are not used in antiseptics. Currently, only three aldehyde compounds are of widespread practical use as disinfectant biocides, namely glutaraldehyde, formaldehyde, and ortho-phthalaldehyde (OPA) despite the demonstration that many other aldehydes possess good antimicrobial activity.[52] However, due to its long contact time other disinfectants are commonly preferred.

Physical

[edit]

Heat

[edit]
Main articles: Dry heat sterilization and Moist heat sterilization

Microorganisms have a minimum temperature, an optimum, and a maximum temperature for growth.[53] High temperature as well as low temperatures are used as physical agents of control. Different organisms show different degrees of resistance or susceptibility to heat or temperature, some organisms such as bacterial endospore are more resistant while vegetative cells are less resistant and are easily killed at lower temperatures.[54] Another method that involves the use of heat to kill microorganisms is fractional sterilization. This process involves the exposure to a temperature of 100 degrees Celsius for an hour per day for several days.[55] Fractional sterilization is also called tyndallization. Bacterial endospores can be killed using this method. Both dry and moist heat are effective in eliminating microbial life. For example, jars used to store preserves such as jam can be sterilized by heating them in a conventional oven. Heat is also used in pasteurization, a method for slowing the spoilage of foods such as milk, cheese, juices, wines and vinegar. Such products are heated to a certain temperature for a set period of time, which greatly reduces the number of harmful microorganisms. Low temperature is also used to inhibit microbial activity by slowing down microbial metabolism.[56]

Radiation

[edit]

Foods are often irradiated to kill harmful pathogens.[57] There are two types of radiations that are used to inhibit the growth of microorganisms – ionizing and non-ionizing radiations.[58] Common sources of radiation used in food sterilization include cobalt-60 (a gamma emitter), electron beams and X-rays.[59] Ultraviolet light is also used to disinfect drinking water, both in small-scale personal-use systems and larger-scale community water purification systems.[60]

Desiccation

[edit]

Desiccation is also known as dehydration.  It is the state of extreme dryness or the process of extreme drying. Some microorganisms like bacteria, yeasts and molds require water for their growth. Desiccation dries up the water content thus inhibiting microbial growth. On the availability of water, the bacteria resume their growth, thus desiccation does not completely inhibit bacterial growth. The instrument used to carry out this process is called a desiccator. This process is widely used in the food industry and is an efficient method for food preservation. Desiccation is also largely used in the pharmaceutical industry to store vaccines and other products.[61]

Antimicrobial surfaces

[edit]

Antimicrobial surfaces are designed to either inhibit the ability of microorganisms to grow or damaging them by chemical (copper toxicity) or physical processes (micro/nano-pillars to rupture cell walls). These surfaces are especially important for the healthcare industry.[62] Designing effective antimicrobial surfaces demands an in-depth understanding of the initial microbe-surface adhesion mechanisms. Molecular dynamics simulation and time-lapse imaging are typically used to investigate these mechanisms.[63]

Osmotic pressure

[edit]

Osmotic pressure is the pressure required to prevent a solvent from passing from a region of high concentration to a region of low concentration through a semipermeable membrane.  When the concentration of dissolved materials or solute is higher inside the cell than it is outside, the cell is said to be in a hypotonic environment and water will flow into the cell.[53]When the bacteria is placed in hypertonic solution, it causes plasmolysis or cell shrinking, similarly in hypotonic solution, bacteria undergoes plasmotysis or turgid state. This plasmolysis and plasmotysis kills bacteria because it causes change in osmotic pressure.[64]

Antimicrobial resistance

[edit]

The misuse and overuse of antimicrobials in humans, animals and plants are the main drivers in the development of drug-resistant pathogens.[4] Antimicrobial resistance (AR) occurs when microbes develop the ability to resist the drugs designed to kill them. AR has the potential to affect people at any stage of life, as well as the healthcare, veterinary and agriculture industries. This makes it one of the world's most urgent public health problems.[65] Antimicrobial resistance mechanisms fall into four main categories: (1) limiting uptake of a drug; (2) modifying a drug target; (3) inactivating a drug; and (4) active drug efflux.[66] It is estimated that bacterial antimicrobial resistance (AMR) was directly responsible for 1.27 million global deaths in 2019 and contributed to 4.95 million deaths.[4]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Antimicrobial

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Antimicrobials are substances that kill or inhibit the growth of microorganisms, including , fungi, viruses, and parasites. These agents, encompassing , antivirals, antifungals, and , are for preventing and treating infectious diseases in humans, animals, and plants. Their mechanisms of action typically involve disrupting essential microbial processes such as synthesis, replication, , or integrity, while aiming for selective to spare host cells. The systematic discovery of antimicrobials accelerated in the mid-20th century, with isolating from soil in 1943–1944, earning him the 1952 in Physiology or Medicine for advancing antibiotic development against and other infections. This era marked a transformative reduction in mortality from bacterial diseases, yet widespread clinical and agricultural use has driven (AMR), where microbes evolve defenses like efflux pumps, enzymatic degradation, or target modifications. AMR directly caused 1.27 million global deaths in 2019 and contributed to nearly 5 million more, with recent surveillance showing resistance rising in over 40% of tracked pathogen-drug combinations from 2018 to 2023. In the United States alone, more than 2.8 million resistant infections occur yearly, underscoring the urgent need for stewardship, novel agents, and alternatives to mitigate this evolving threat.

Historical Development

Pre-Modern Observations

Ancient civilizations empirically observed the inhibitory effects of certain natural substances on wound infections through trial-and-error application, predating microscopic understanding of microbes. In , medical papyri such as the (c. 1600 BC, reflecting practices from c. 2500 BC) and (c. 1550 BC) prescribed mixed with grease or resins for dressing wounds, noting its ability to staunch bleeding, reduce inflammation, and prevent tissue decay—outcomes consistent with lower observed infection rates compared to untreated cases. Similarly, moldy bread was applied to suppurating wounds, with healers like (c. 2650 BC) reportedly using it to treat skin infections, correlating with accelerated healing and diminished pus formation in surviving records. These practices demonstrated early causal inferences: substances like , derived from nectar and possessing hygroscopic and low-pH properties, drew out moisture from wounds while inhibiting observable , as evidenced by mummification techniques where honey preserved tissues without fostering decay. Mold from bread, likely containing penicillin-producing fungi such as , selectively curbed bacterial growth without broadly harming host tissue, as inferred from repeated successful applications in battlefield and surgical contexts described in papyri. , employed by Egyptians in water storage vessels and as wound cauterants from at least 2000 BC, yielded empirically purer water and faster wound closure, with archaeological residues in medical artifacts supporting its against contaminants. Beyond , Sumerians (c. 2000 BC) and later and Romans extended these observations, using plant-derived extracts like and onions—rich in —for topical applications that reduced and suppuration without evident host , highlighting selective antimicrobial action through comparative outcomes in historical texts. Such pre-modern uses underscored causal realism: repeated correlations between substance application and diminished markers (e.g., , swelling) drove adoption, untainted by modern mechanistic overlays, though reliant on anecdotal aggregation rather than controlled quantification.

Early Synthetic Agents (1900s–1920s)

, a German physician and immunologist, developed arsphenamine, marketed as Salvarsan, in 1910 as the first synthetic chemotherapeutic agent targeted against bacterial infection. Building on his concept of selective toxicity—wherein a chemical exhibits affinity for pathogens over host cells—Ehrlich and collaborator screened over 600 derivatives in rabbit models infected with , the spirochete causing , identifying compound 606 (arsphenamine) for its efficacy in eradicating the bacterium while minimizing host damage. This empirical approach marked a shift from nonspecific treatments like mercury or , which offered limited causal impact due to their broad toxicity without targeted antimicrobial action. Upon clinical introduction in 1910, Salvarsan demonstrated causal efficacy against early-stage through intravenous administration, rapidly killing T. pallidum and resolving primary and secondary symptoms in treated patients, as evidenced by and serological tests showing clearance. Historical records indicate it reduced disease progression and transmission when administered promptly, contributing to declines in syphilis-related morbidity, though population-level mortality data reflect gradual improvements intertwined with diagnostic advances and measures rather than abrupt drops attributable solely to the drug. Despite its breakthroughs, Salvarsan had significant limitations, including arsenic-induced toxicity manifesting as nausea, fever, skin reactions, and rare fatalities, particularly in patients with compromised liver function or , where it failed to penetrate the effectively. Treatment required multiple doses over months, often yielding incomplete cures if adherence faltered, as residual spirochetes could persist and , underscoring the need for less toxic, broader-spectrum agents in subsequent decades. These shortcomings highlighted the challenges of balancing potency and safety in early synthetic antimicrobials.

Discovery and Mass Production of Antibiotics (1928–1950s)

In September 1928, Scottish bacteriologist Alexander Fleming at St. Mary's Hospital in London observed that a contaminant mold, later identified as Penicillium notatum, inhibited the growth of Staphylococcus bacteria on a culture plate left open to air, leading him to identify the mold's secreted substance as an antibacterial agent he named penicillin. Fleming published his findings in 1929, demonstrating penicillin's lytic effect on bacteria in vitro, but he could not achieve sufficient purification or stability for clinical use, limiting its immediate application. Progress stalled until 1939, when biochemist Ernst Boris Chain at Oxford University revived interest in Fleming's work under pathologist ; their team, including Norman Heatley, developed methods to extract and purify penicillin from mold broth, confirming its potency against . In May 1940, they conducted successful mouse trials showing penicillin protected infected animals from lethal doses of streptococci, followed by limited human trials in 1941 on eight patients with severe infections like and , where four survived despite impure supplies exhausting quickly. World War II accelerated mass production; British efforts yielded only grams, prompting Florey's 1941 U.S. visit, where the coordinated industrial scaling via deep-tank fermentation by firms like , reaching 2.3 million doses by D-Day in June 1944 and over 646 billion units total by war's end. Empirical data from Allied field hospitals showed penicillin reduced mortality from bacterial wound infections, such as and , from near 100% untreated to under 1% in treated cases, enabling soldier recovery rates exceeding 90% for otherwise fatal pneumonias and enabling battlefield amputations to drop by half. Parallel discoveries expanded the antibiotic arsenal; in 1943, microbiologist at , with graduate student Albert Schatz and Elizabeth Bugie, isolated from soil actinomycete Streptomyces griseus, the first antibiotic effective against and . Clinical trials beginning in 1944 demonstrated cured pulmonary in patients previously doomed to sanatorium isolation or death, with early cohorts showing 80-90% improvement in sputum conversion and lesion resolution versus historical controls. These advances halved U.S. mortality from 40 per 100,000 in 1940 to under 20 by 1950, establishing antibiotics' causal role in curbing infectious disease burdens.

Expansion and Diversification (1960s–1980s)

The 1960s marked the introduction of first-generation cephalosporins, such as cephalothin in 1964 and cephalexin in 1967, which expanded treatment options beyond penicillins by offering similar beta-lactam activity against while providing greater stability against staphylococcal beta-lactamases. Second-generation cephalosporins, including in 1978, improved gram-negative coverage, and third-generation agents like (introduced in 1981) and ceftazidime (1983) further broadened efficacy against and , enabling therapy for severe hospital-acquired infections previously resistant to earlier antibiotics. Concurrently, fluoroquinolones emerged as a novel synthetic class; in 1962 initiated quinolone development, but fluorinated derivatives like , approved in 1987, achieved potent oral and intravenous activity against a wide spectrum including urinary tract pathogens and respiratory infections, reducing reliance on injectable agents. These advancements facilitated prophylactic antimicrobial use, significantly lowering surgical site infection rates; studies from the to 1980s demonstrated reductions of 50-60% across procedures like clean-contaminated surgeries when antibiotics were administered perioperatively, correlating with decreased postoperative morbidity and hospital stays. In , expanded antimicrobials complemented immunosuppressants like cyclosporine (introduced clinically in the late 1970s), preventing opportunistic infections that had previously doomed early graft attempts; for instance, prophylaxis against and fungi post-renal or liver transplant improved one-year survival rates from under 50% in the to over 80% by the mid-1980s in major centers. Initial resistance emerged, such as reported in 1961 and plasmid-mediated production in gram-negatives by the 1970s, yet the influx of new classes maintained net clinical gains, with overall infectious disease mortality in the U.S. declining by approximately 20-30% for treatable bacterial conditions during this era due to diversified therapeutic options. Longitudinal data from cohorts showed that diversified regimens controlled outbreaks and supported complex interventions, outweighing early resistance signals until broader patterns intensified later.

Decline in Innovation and Rise of Resistance Concerns (1990s–Present)

The development of new antimicrobials has experienced a pronounced slowdown since the , with global approvals dropping to historically low levels. The reports that only 13 new antibiotics received marketing authorization worldwide from July 2017 onward, of which just two introduced novel chemical classes capable of addressing unmet needs against resistant pathogens. This scarcity underscores an "innovation drought," as evidenced by U.S. data showing few truly novel antibacterial molecular entities approved between 1980 and 2024, with most representing incremental modifications to existing structures rather than new mechanisms of action. Economic disincentives form a primary causal barrier to revitalizing pipelines. Antibiotics generally require short treatment durations—often 7–14 days—yielding limited sales volumes compared to pharmaceuticals for chronic conditions like or cancer, which sustain revenue over years through repeat prescriptions. Antimicrobial stewardship initiatives, aimed at preserving efficacy, further constrain usage by promoting targeted prescribing, thereby diminishing projected returns on the high-risk, capital-intensive process of and clinical trials, which can exceed $1 billion per candidate. Parallel to this stagnation, has elicited growing concerns since the , fueled by surveillance data revealing escalating rates among key pathogens. The WHO's global monitoring from 2018 to 2023 documented resistance increases in over 40% of tracked pathogen-antibiotic combinations, averaging a 5% annual rise, particularly in common infections like urinary tract and bloodstream cases. Initial alarms in the centered on pathogens such as vancomycin-resistant enterococci and multidrug-resistant gram-negatives, yet while empirical resistance trends warrant vigilance, some projections of imminent "post-antibiotic eras" have faced scrutiny for relying on models with uncertain causal attributions to factors like agricultural versus human antibiotic consumption, as global attributable mortality rates from bacterial AMR actually declined from 19.8 to 15.5 deaths per 100,000 population between 1990 and 2019.

Definition and Classification

Core Definitions and Scope

Antimicrobials are chemical or physical agents that inhibit the growth of or kill microorganisms, encompassing bacteria, fungi, viruses, and parasites, while minimizing harm to host cells through selective toxicity. This selectivity relies on exploiting biochemical differences, such as targeting prokaryotic ribosomes in bacteria or fungal ergosterol synthesis, which are absent or structurally divergent in eukaryotic host cells, thereby achieving therapeutic efficacy with reduced host toxicity as evidenced by differential minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) in vitro. Empirical validation of antimicrobial action requires causal demonstration via standardized assays like broth dilution for MIC—the lowest concentration preventing visible microbial growth after 18-24 hours incubation—or time-kill curves tracking logarithmic reductions in viable counts, distinguishing true inhibition from mere stasis or host-mediated effects. Antibiotics represent a subset of antimicrobials specifically active against , either bactericidal (directly killing via disruption or DNA damage) or bacteriostatic (halting replication through protein synthesis inhibition), but excluding agents targeting non-bacterial pathogens like antivirals or antifungals. In contrast, antiseptics are topical antimicrobials formulated for application to intact or mucous membranes to reduce transient microbial load, often exhibiting broader spectra but lower potency against systemic infections due to formulation constraints and potential tissue irritation at higher concentrations. The scope of antimicrobials includes synthetic compounds (e.g., sulfonamides), natural products (e.g., penicillin derivatives), and non-chemical methods (e.g., ultraviolet irradiation disrupting DNA), unified by verifiable selective microbial inactivation over host damage in controlled studies, prioritizing mechanisms with direct causal links to growth inhibition rather than correlative clinical outcomes alone. This breadth excludes disinfectants, which target inanimate surfaces without regard for host compatibility, ensuring antimicrobials' utility in therapeutic contexts demands rigorous spectra confirmation against specific pathogens via susceptibility testing.

Classification by Target Microorganism

Antimicrobials are categorized by their primary target microorganism—bacteria, fungi, viruses, or parasites—owing to structural and metabolic distinctions that render cross-efficacy rare, as evidenced by in vitro and clinical susceptibility testing showing minimal overlap in inhibitory activity. This empirical separation arises because bacterial agents exploit prokaryotic features like cell walls, which are absent in viruses lacking independent or in fungi with chitin-based walls. For instance, beta-lactam antibiotics, such as penicillins, demonstrate high efficacy against via targeted disruption of cell wall synthesis but exhibit no activity against fungal or viral pathogens in standardized assays. Antibacterials form the largest class, directed at prokaryotic bacteria, with subdivisions based on Gram staining reflecting cell envelope variations: , featuring thick layers, respond to agents like , while , with outer membranes, require agents penetrating barriers, such as certain cephalosporins. Empirical data from tests confirm antibacterials' specificity, with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) often exceeding therapeutic ranges against non-bacterial microbes, underscoring inefficacy against fungi or viruses. Antifungals target eukaryotic fungi, including yeasts like Candida species and molds, exploiting differences such as ergosterol in membranes versus cholesterol in human cells; azole compounds, for example, inhibit ergosterol biosynthesis in yeasts, achieving low MICs against fungal isolates but showing no antibacterial or antiviral effects in comparative susceptibility panels. Clinical trials and surveillance data reinforce this limitation, with antibacterials failing to reduce fungal burden in mixed infections, necessitating separate agents. Antivirals address viruses, obligate intracellular parasites without ribosomes or metabolic machinery, relying instead on host cells for replication; nucleoside analogs like acyclovir selectively inhibit viral polymerases in herpesviruses, with plaque reduction assays demonstrating virus-specific activity and negligible impact on bacteria or fungi due to absent viral targets. Antiparasitics combat protozoan and helminthic parasites, diverse eukaryotes or multicellular organisms; ivermectin, for instance, paralyzes nematodes by modulating invertebrate chloride channels, effective in stool ova counts for helminthiases but inert against bacteria, fungi, or viruses in cross-challenge studies. These categories highlight causal constraints: parasitic metabolic pathways diverge sufficiently from bacterial ones to preclude broad efficacy, as quantified by absent zone inhibition in disk diffusion tests across phyla.

Classification by Spectrum of Activity and Mechanism of Action

Antimicrobials are classified by spectrum of activity into narrow-spectrum agents, which target a limited subset of microorganisms, and broad-spectrum agents, which affect a wider range. Narrow-spectrum examples include vancomycin, effective primarily against Gram-positive bacteria such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), while broad-spectrum agents like tetracyclines inhibit both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria as well as some atypicals. This distinction arises from structural specificities in microbial targets; for instance, vancomycin binds uniquely to the D-ala-D-ala terminus in Gram-positive cell walls, sparing Gram-negatives due to their outer membrane barrier. Modeling studies demonstrate that prioritizing narrow-spectrum agents empirically reduces resistance emergence in secondary drugs by minimizing collateral selective pressure on bystander microbiota. Broad-spectrum use, while enabling initial coverage in polymicrobial or unidentified infections, correlates with higher adverse events without improving cure rates in pediatric respiratory cases. Mechanisms of action provide another classificatory axis, rooted in biochemical interference with essential microbial processes. Beta-lactam antibiotics disrupt cell wall synthesis by acylating , preventing cross-linking and triggering autolytic enzymes that cause osmotic in growing cells. inhibit protein synthesis by binding the 50S ribosomal subunit, blocking translocation of peptidyl-tRNA and stalling polypeptide chain elongation, which halts metabolic functions. Quinolones target by inhibiting and topoisomerase IV, enzymes critical for supercoiling and decatenation, leading to double-strand breaks and during division. These pathways exploit prokaryotic-specific vulnerabilities—absent in host cells—creating dependency on precise timing of microbial growth phases for efficacy, as verified in time-kill assays that quantify log reductions in viable counts. A related dichotomy is bactericidal versus bacteriostatic activity, defined by ≥3-log kill (99.9% reduction) within 24 hours for the former, versus mere growth inhibition for the latter, dependent on host for ultimate clearance. Beta-lactams exemplify bactericidal action via rapid , while tetracyclines are typically bacteriostatic through reversible ribosomal . Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials, encompassing over 50 studies across infections like and bacteremia, find no broad clinical superiority of bactericidal agents; equivalence holds in most scenarios, with bacteriostatics occasionally outperforming in immunocompromised hosts or biofilms where immune dominates. Choice hinges on causal factors such as inoculum size, site penetration, and immune competence, rather than activity class alone, underscoring the need for susceptibility-guided .

Chemical Antimicrobials

Antibacterials

Antibacterials encompass a diverse array of chemical compounds, primarily synthetic or semi-synthetic, that selectively target bacterial processes to exert bactericidal or bacteriostatic effects. Major classes include beta-lactams, which inhibit synthesis; fluoroquinolones, which disrupt ; and aminoglycosides, which interfere with protein synthesis. These agents evolved from narrow-spectrum options effective mainly against to broader formulations addressing Gram-negative pathogens, whose outer membranes pose penetration barriers requiring agents with specific porin-channel compatibility or evasion. Beta-lactams, the most widely used class, covalently bind to penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs), halting peptidoglycan cross-linking essential for bacterial cell wall integrity during division. Penicillins, such as penicillin G, demonstrate high efficacy against Gram-positive cocci like Streptococcus pyogenes (MIC90 ≤0.03 μg/mL) and select anaerobes, but susceptibility wanes against beta-lactamase producers. Their pharmacokinetics are characterized by time-dependent killing, where efficacy correlates with the free drug concentration exceeding the minimum inhibitory concentration (fT>MIC) for 40-50% of the dosing interval against Gram-positives and 100% against Gram-negatives. To counter enzymatic hydrolysis by beta-lactamases, inhibitors like clavulanic acid are co-administered with penicillins (e.g., amoxicillin-clavulanate), restoring activity against resistant strains such as beta-lactamase-positive Haemophilus influenzae by irreversible acylation of the enzyme's active site, achieving synergistic MIC reductions of 4- to 64-fold in vitro. Fluoroquinolones target bacterial type II topoisomerases, primarily DNA gyrase (a tetramer of GyrA and GyrB subunits) in Gram-negatives, stabilizing cleavage complexes that block DNA religation and strand passage, leading to double-strand breaks and cell death. Ciprofloxacin exemplifies broad-spectrum potency, with MIC90 values of 0.015-0.5 μg/mL against Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, enabling treatment of complicated urinary tract and respiratory infections. Their concentration-dependent pharmacokinetics favor peak-to-MIC ratios >10-12 for optimal bactericidal activity, though Gram-negative outer membrane impermeability and efflux contribute to variable efficacy. Aminoglycosides, such as and gentamicin, bind the 16S rRNA of the 30S ribosomal subunit, inducing mRNA misreading and inhibiting translocation, with rapid, concentration-dependent bactericidal effects particularly against aerobic Gram-negative bacilli like (MIC90 1-4 μg/mL for gentamicin). , isolated in 1943, marked a shift toward Gram-negative coverage, curing and plague with once-daily dosing leveraging post-antibiotic effects lasting hours. Synergy arises in combinations, such as with beta-lactams, where disruption enhances aminoglycoside uptake, reducing MICs by 4- to 16-fold against enterococci. Overall, these classes underscore causal mechanisms rooted in bacterial vulnerabilities, with empirical MIC data guiding susceptibility breakpoints (e.g., CLSI standards: susceptible if MIC ≤2-4 μg/mL for many agents).

Antifungals

Antifungal agents target pathogenic fungi, which pose treatment challenges due to their eukaryotic nature, sharing cellular structures and metabolic pathways with human host cells, thereby restricting selective and increasing the risk of adverse effects. Unlike antibacterials, which exploit prokaryotic differences, antifungals primarily disrupt fungal-specific components like in membranes or β-1,3-glucan in cell walls, but off-target effects on mammalian or immune modulation can limit dosing. Systemic antifungals are essential for invasive infections in immunocompromised patients, such as those with candidemia or , while topical agents suffice for superficial dermatophytoses. Major classes include polyenes, azoles, and echinocandins. Polyenes, represented by (introduced in 1955), bind in fungal membranes to form pores, causing ion leakage and cell death; lipid formulations like lipid complex improve safety for invasive fungal infections, achieving response rates of approximately 50-60% in clinical trials with reduced compared to conventional forms. Azoles, developed from the onward with milestones like (1976) and (1981) for , inhibit 14-α-demethylase to block synthesis, disrupting membrane integrity; reduced mortality in cryptococcal when added to , per randomized trials. Echinocandins, such as (approved 2001), inhibit β-1,3-glucan synthase to weaken cell walls, exerting fungicidal activity against Candida spp. and fungistatic effects against ; in guinea pig models of disseminated , doses of 1 mg/kg/day yielded 90% survival, outperforming lower doses.
ClassMechanismKey ExamplesEfficacy Notes
Polyenes binding, membrane poresEffective for severe invasive infections; lipid versions reduce mortality risks in trials vs. conventional (e.g., 6 mg/kg/day ABCD showed comparable efficacy to with better tolerability).
Azoles biosynthesis inhibition, superior to for primary invasive therapy, with 53% vs. 32% success rates at 12 weeks in randomized trials.
Echinocandins β-glucan synthesis block, First-line for candidemia; combination with reduced mortality in some models, though monotherapy limits efficacy.
Resistance complicates therapy, particularly in azoles, where mechanisms include ERG11 altering drug targets or efflux pumps; rates remain low (1-2%) for but exceed 10% for non-albicans species like C. glabrata in immunocompromised cohorts, driven by prophylactic use in hospitals. resistance, via fks , affects <5% of Candida isolates but is rising in Candida auris outbreaks. Clinical evidence underscores causal links to outcomes: voriconazole monotherapy for invasive aspergillosis lowered 12-week mortality to 29% vs. 44% with amphotericin B in a 2002 multicenter trial of 391 patients. Topical azoles like clotrimazole achieve >80% cure rates for infections but lack systemic penetration for deep-seated disease. Overall, limited class diversity—only four main systemic categories since the —highlights stalled innovation amid rising resistance.

Antivirals

Antivirals inhibit by targeting processes unique to the viral life cycle, such as synthesis, protein processing, or virion release, which differ from host cellular machinery. These agents exploit biochemical distinctions, including viral enzymes like or neuraminidase, to selectively impair progeny virus production without broadly disrupting host functions. Unlike broad cellular toxins, effective antivirals achieve specificity through or chain termination at viral targets, as seen in analogs that mimic substrates for viral polymerases. Nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), such as and lamivudine, function by being phosphorylated intracellularly and incorporated into nascent HIV DNA by the virus's , causing chain termination due to the absence of a 3'-hydroxyl group. In antiretroviral (ART), NRTIs contribute to suppression rates exceeding 85% to undetectable levels (<50 copies/mL) after 48 weeks in treatment-naive patients, with longitudinal cohort data showing sustained suppression in 87.7% of adherent individuals at 12 months post-initiation. Protease inhibitors (PIs), like ritonavir-boosted darunavir, bind to the HIV protease active site, preventing cleavage of viral polyproteins into functional components essential for mature virion assembly. Longitudinal analyses of PI-based regimens demonstrate virologic failure rates below 12% in patients maintaining HIV RNA below 400 copies/mL at multiple time points, enabling long-term control of replication in over 90% of compliant cases. For influenza, oseltamivir acts as a neuraminidase inhibitor, binding to the enzyme on virion surfaces to block sialic acid cleavage required for release from infected cells, thereby limiting spread within the host. Early administration (within 48 hours of symptom onset) in high-risk adults has been associated with reduced hospitalization duration in severe cases, with meta-analyses indicating shortened stays by approximately 1 day in hospitalized patients, though overall risk reduction varies by population and timing. Empirical data from randomized trials confirm symptom alleviation, but prophylactic use shows inconsistent hospitalization prevention in outpatients. A primary limitation of antivirals stems from viruses' elevated mutation rates, particularly in RNA viruses where error-prone polymerases generate 10^{-6} to 10^{-4} substitutions per nucleotide per replication cycle, far exceeding DNA virus rates of 10^{-8} to 10^{-6}. Genomic sequencing reveals this fosters quasispecies diversity, enabling rapid selection of resistant variants under drug pressure, as documented in where point mutations in reverse transcriptase confer NRTI resistance within months of monotherapy. Such dynamics necessitate combination therapies to suppress emergent mutants, though incomplete adherence or suboptimal dosing accelerates fixation of resistance mutations across viral populations.

Antiparasitics

Antiparasitics encompass chemical agents selectively toxic to eukaryotic parasites, including protozoans such as Plasmodium species and Giardia lamblia, and helminths like Onchocerca volvulus, by exploiting differences in metabolic pathways, membrane structures, and lifecycle stages not shared with host cells or prokaryotic bacteria. These drugs typically disrupt parasite-specific processes, such as heme detoxification in malaria parasites or neuromuscular transmission in nematodes, leading to paralysis, oxidative damage, or halted reproduction, while exhibiting negligible antibacterial activity due to the absence of analogous targets in bacterial cells. Prominent among antiprotozoal agents are artemisinin derivatives, sesquiterpene lactones isolated from , which activate via cleavage of their endoperoxide bridge by ferrous iron in the parasite's food vacuole, yielding carbon-centered free radicals and reactive oxygen species that alkylate proteins, lipids, and heme, thereby causing rapid destruction of intraerythrocytic stages during the asexual blood lifecycle phase. Field trials in sub-Saharan African endemic zones, coordinated by the , confirm artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) achieve adequate clinical and parasitological responses in over 95% of uncomplicated P. falciparum cases, with day-28 cure rates often surpassing 97% when paired with partners like lumefantrine or amodiaquine, though partial resistance—manifesting as delayed clearance—has emerged in since 2008. ACTs reduce asexual parasite biomass by factors up to 10,000-fold every 48 hours, underpinning their role in reducing malaria transmission intensity in mass administration pilots across high-burden regions like the . For giardiasis, induced by the flagellated protozoan Giardia lamblia adhering to the intestinal mucosa, nitroimidazoles such as metronidazole and tinidazole function as prodrugs reduced by parasite pyruvate:ferredoxin oxidoreductase to cytotoxic nitroso radicals, damaging DNA and disrupting trophozoite replication during the encystment-excystment lifecycle transition. WHO-supported efficacy studies report 5-nitroimidazoles yield parasitological cure rates of 80-92% in pediatric and adult cohorts from endemic areas like Cuba and Latin America, outperforming comparators like albendazole alone, though nitroimidazole-refractory strains—linked to treatment adherence lapses and genetic mutations—necessitate retreatment or alternatives like quinacrine in up to 20% of cases. Anthelmintics like ivermectin, a macrocyclic lactone derived from Streptomyces avermitilis, target helminthic parasites by hyperpolarizing nerve and muscle cells via potentiation of glutamate- and GABA-gated chloride channels, immobilizing microfilariae and interrupting transmission in vector-borne lifecycles such as onchocerciasis caused by O. volvulus. Longitudinal data from WHO's Mectizan Donation Program reveal mass drug administration (MDA) with annual or biannual ivermectin doses has reduced microfilarial prevalence by over 90% in sentinel communities across sub-Saharan Africa after 15-20 years, as evidenced in Togo where transmission indices fell below elimination thresholds (<1% infectivity in vectors) following sustained coverage exceeding 80%. In Cameroon’s Mbam Valley, even short MDA interruptions rebound prevalence modestly but do not reverse gains, affirming ivermectin's macrofilaricidal synergy with community-directed treatment in averting blindness and skin disease in hyperendemic foci. These interventions highlight antiparasitics' specificity, as ivermectin shows no clinically relevant bactericidal effects despite in vitro interactions, preserving gut microbiota integrity in treated populations.

Broad-Spectrum and Miscellaneous Agents

Chlorhexidine, a cationic biguanide antiseptic, exhibits broad-spectrum activity by disrupting microbial cell membranes through binding to negatively charged phospholipids, effectively targeting Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, fungi, and enveloped viruses, though it shows reduced efficacy against non-enveloped viruses, mycobacteria, and spores. In laboratory settings, chlorhexidine at concentrations of 0.2% demonstrates persistent antimicrobial effects on treated surfaces, reducing bacterial loads from hospital isolates by up to 99.9% over 24 hours. Its utility in non-selective environments, such as skin antisepsis and surface disinfection, stems from this multi-target disruption, but its toxicity profile limits systemic use, with potential for skin irritation and anaphylaxis in rare cases. Triclosan, a synthetic phenolic antimicrobial, inhibits enoyl-acyl carrier protein reductase in fatty acid synthesis pathways, conferring broad activity against bacteria and fungi at concentrations as low as 0.1-1% in consumer products like soaps. However, its overuse has been linked to selective pressure fostering cross-resistance to antibiotics via efflux pumps and mutations, with environmental persistence exacerbating ecological risks through bioaccumulation in aquatic microbiomes. Aldehydes such as glutaraldehyde serve as high-level disinfectants for sterilization of heat-sensitive medical instruments, alkylating proteins and nucleic acids to achieve broad-spectrum sporicidal activity, effective against bacteria, viruses, and fungi at 2% concentrations with exposure times of 10-90 minutes. Quaternary ammonium compounds (quats), another miscellaneous class, act as cationic surfactants denaturing microbial membranes, providing intermediate-level disinfection suitable for non-critical surfaces but with variable efficacy against non-enveloped viruses. In healthcare settings, routine application of these agents in sterilization protocols correlates with reduced nosocomial infection rates; for instance, enhanced surface disinfection has demonstrated up to 50% decreases in environmental pathogen transmission in controlled trials, though evidence for superiority over detergent cleaning alone remains inconsistent for low-risk surfaces like floors. Overuse, however, disrupts host-associated microbiomes, as evidenced by studies showing altered gut and skin microbial diversity following chronic exposure to disinfectants and antiseptics, potentially impairing immune homeostasis and promoting pathogen overgrowth. These agents' non-selective nature underscores their role in high-burden environments but necessitates judicious application to mitigate resistance and ecological imbalances.

Non-Chemical Antimicrobials

Physical Methods

Physical methods of antimicrobial control exploit biophysical principles such as thermodynamics and molecular disruption to inactivate microorganisms without chemical agents. Heat application denatures microbial proteins and enzymes, disrupting cellular function and leading to cell death, while radiation induces DNA damage through direct ionization or photochemical reactions. Desiccation and osmotic pressure manipulate water availability, causing dehydration and plasmolysis that inhibit metabolic processes essential for microbial survival. These methods achieve quantifiable reductions in viable microbial counts, often measured in logarithmic (log) terms, where a 1-log reduction represents a 90% decrease in population. Moist heat methods, including pasteurization and autoclaving, are highly effective due to water's role in heat transfer and protein coagulation. Pasteurization applies controlled temperatures to reduce pathogen loads logarithmically without full sterilization; for instance, the standard low-temperature-long-time process at 63°C for 30 minutes targets pathogens like Mycobacterium tuberculosis in milk, achieving sufficient log reductions to prevent disease transmission while preserving product quality. Autoclaving uses steam under pressure at 121°C and 15 psi for 15-20 minutes, yielding at least a 6-log reduction in resistant bacterial spores like Bacillus stearothermophilus by penetrating materials and denaturing macromolecules more efficiently than dry heat. Radiation methods include ultraviolet (UV) and ionizing types like gamma rays. UV radiation, particularly UV-C at wavelengths around 254-265 nm, forms pyrimidine dimers in DNA, preventing replication and transcription; in water treatment, doses of 40-100 mJ/cm² typically achieve 4-6 log reductions in bacteria such as Escherichia coli, though efficacy depends on water clarity and microbial repair mechanisms like photoreactivation. Gamma irradiation from cobalt-60 sources penetrates materials deeply, generating reactive oxygen species that indirectly damage DNA and proteins; standard sterilization doses of 25 kGy provide over 6-log reductions in a broad microbial bioburden, with D10 values (dose for 1-log reduction) varying from 0.2-3 kGy for most bacteria and higher for spores. Desiccation inhibits growth by lowering (aw), the availability of unbound for biochemical reactions; most vegetative cease growth below aw 0.91, while fungi tolerate down to 0.7, as disrupts function and transport over time. , induced by high concentrations of solutes like salt or sugar, draws from microbial cells via hypertonicity, causing and metabolic arrest; in , levels above 10-15% or exceeding 50% prevent spoilage by pathogens and spoilers, reducing viable counts through sustained stress. These approaches are integral to applications like and medical sterilization, where empirical validation through survivor curve analysis confirms their reliability against diverse microbial challenges.

Biological and Natural Agents

Bacteriophages, viruses that specifically infect and lyse bacterial cells, represent a targeted biological antimicrobial approach known as . In clinical trials from 2019 to 2023, twelve studies evaluated for multidrug-resistant (MDR) Klebsiella pneumoniae , demonstrating clinical efficacy in reducing bacterial loads. A analysis of phage treatments reported clinical improvement in 77.2% of patients with severe bacterial infections and eradication of target in 61.3% of cases. Inhaled trials in 2025 further showed potential in decreasing sputum , including MDR and pan-drug-resistant (PDR) pathogens, though outcomes varied by strain specificity. Bacteriocins, ribosomally synthesized produced by bacteria, inhibit closely related strains by targeting the cell envelope, often forming pores that disrupt membrane integrity. These agents, particularly from , exhibit activity against both susceptible and drug-resistant , with some extending to Gram-negative pathogens via outer membrane permeabilization. Their potency at low concentrations positions them as adjuncts in and potential therapeutics, though efficacy depends on producer strain and target susceptibility. Natural agents, such as plant-derived essential oils, exert antimicrobial effects primarily through membrane perturbation and leakage of cellular contents, showing greater susceptibility in Gram-positive than Gram-negative bacteria. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) for essential oils like cinnamon or tea tree oil range from 0.039% to 1.25% against common pathogens, often higher than those of synthetic antibiotics, indicating reduced standalone potency without synergistic combinations. Copper surfaces provide contact killing via oligodynamic action, where released Cu²⁺ ions damage bacterial proteins, DNA, and membranes, achieving rapid inactivation of bacteria, yeasts, and viruses within minutes to hours. Despite these mechanisms, biological and natural agents face empirical constraints, including narrow host specificity that precludes broad-spectrum use, akin to phages' limitation to particular strains and risk of lysogeny where integration into bacterial genomes evades . Essential oils and suffer from stability degradation under environmental stresses like heat or shifts, and controlled trials reveal no consistent superiority over synthetics in clinical outcomes, underscoring overhyped claims of inherent without robust comparative data. Copper's ion-release mechanism, while effective on dry surfaces, diminishes in humid conditions or biofilms, limiting scalability.

Applications and Uses

Human Medicine

Antimicrobials are employed in human medicine primarily for treating bacterial, fungal, viral, and parasitic infections, as well as for prophylaxis in high-risk scenarios such as and . Empirical evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses demonstrates their efficacy in reducing infection rates and mortality. For instance, perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis in has been shown to decrease surgical site infections (SSIs) by approximately 52%, with incidence dropping from 7.4% to 3.4% in prophylaxis groups compared to controls (incidence rate ratio 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37–0.62). In organ transplant recipients, meta-analyses of RCTs indicate that prophylaxis significantly lowers SSI rates without increasing adverse events, supporting its routine use in these immunosuppressed populations. These interventions have contributed to broader gains in ; historical data link the introduction of antibiotics to a rise from 47 years in 1900 to over 74 years for males and 80 for females by the late , primarily through reduced infectious disease mortality. Empiric therapy algorithms, often guided by biomarkers like procalcitonin or machine learning models, enable rapid initiation of broad-spectrum antimicrobials while minimizing overuse. RCTs show that procalcitonin-based algorithms reduce antibiotic duration and exposure without compromising clinical outcomes, such as mortality or treatment failure, in critically ill patients with suspected sepsis. Inappropriate empiric choices, conversely, elevate 30-day and in-hospital mortality risks, underscoring the value of algorithm-driven selection tailored to local resistance patterns and patient factors. For polymicrobial infections, such as those in intra-abdominal sepsis or healthcare-associated bloodstream infections, combination therapies provide superior coverage; meta-analyses report lower mortality with combinations versus monotherapy for multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens, achieving higher clinical success rates. Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs), involving prospective audit and feedback, optimize usage without sacrificing efficacy. Multicenter RCTs demonstrate ASPs reduce overall antibiotic consumption by 14-19% and restricted drug use by up to 27%, while maintaining or improving patient outcomes like reduced length of stay and lower Clostridium difficile incidence. Benefit-risk assessments affirm that judicious use yields net positive ratios, with prophylaxis and targeted therapy averting far more infection-related deaths than the adverse events from overuse, countering concerns by highlighting empirical usage-benefit balances in controlled settings. These strategies ensure sustained therapeutic impact, as evidenced by global data showing minimal net mortality shifts from resistance amid overall infection control successes.

Agriculture and Animal Husbandry

In livestock production, antimicrobials serve therapeutic purposes to combat bacterial infections, prophylactic roles to curb spread in high-density operations, and—prior to restrictions—growth promotion to optimize feed utilization and animal performance. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration's Guidance for Industry #213, finalized in 2013 and fully implemented by 2017, withdrew approvals for medically important antibiotics in used for non-therapeutic growth enhancement or feed efficiency, shifting such uses to veterinary oversight. Before these changes, subtherapeutic dosing improved outcomes, with pigs on antibiotic-supplemented feed requiring 10-15% less feed to achieve target growth levels, thereby enhancing overall farm productivity and resource . Empirical assessments of productivity underscore these benefits: antibiotics as feed additives historically boosted average daily gains and reduced mortality in , , and by modulating and suppressing subclinical infections, contributing to expanded global meat supplies amid rising demand. On , genomic sequencing and epidemiological tracing indicate limited direct transmission from farm animals to pathogens; for instance, whole-genome analyses of shared resistance genes in Escherichia coli and Salmonella attribute less than 20% of cases to livestock sources, dwarfed by contributions from excessive clinical prescribing, where causal links via patient-environment-hospital cycles predominate. This evidence challenges disproportionate emphasis on , as overuse—accounting for over 80% of selective pressure in settings—drives the majority of clinically relevant resistance . In crop protection, antimicrobials target bacterial pathogens affecting yields, with bactericides like copper-based formulations and antibiotics such as applied to high-value fruits and vegetables. These interventions avert severe losses; for example, managing in apple and orchards prevents tree mortality rates exceeding 30-50% in susceptible varieties, while oxytetracycline use against citrus greening has sustained U.S. production amid disease pressure. Overall applications, including antimicrobials, have reduced potential crop losses by up to 47% in regions like , bolstering without the exaggerated environmental risks often cited, given the trace volumes involved relative to animal or human sectors. Such targeted use maintains output stability for bacterial-susceptible crops, where alternatives like resistant varieties lag in deployment.

Industrial and Environmental Applications

Antimicrobial agents are widely utilized in to sanitize equipment, surfaces, and products, thereby minimizing microbial contamination and extending shelf life. The U.S. (FDA) oversees the application of these agents in processed foods, on raw commodities during preparation and packing, and in processing facilities to control pathogens like Salmonella and Listeria. technologies incorporate antimicrobials such as organic acids or essential oils into films, which migrate to food surfaces to inhibit spoilage , achieving reductions in microbial loads by up to 2-3 log cycles in controlled studies. These methods have demonstrated efficacy in preserving perishable items, with bacteriocin-producing applied as protective cultures in and products to suppress pathogens without altering sensory qualities. Antimicrobial surfaces engineered for industrial settings, such as those embedded with silver nanoparticles (AgNPs), provide sustained protection against formation on processing equipment and packaging materials. AgNPs release ions that disrupt bacterial cell membranes, exhibiting broad-spectrum activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative species, including and , with minimum inhibitory concentrations as low as 1-10 μg/mL in polymer coatings. In applications, AgNP-infused plastics have reduced microbial adhesion by over 90% in lab tests, preventing cross-contamination during storage and transport. These surfaces are particularly valued in high-moisture environments like beverage production lines, where they lower the risk of equipment fouling and associated downtime. In environmental applications, (UV) irradiation and are deployed for disinfection to achieve verifiable inactivation prior to discharge or reuse. Low-pressure UV systems deliver doses of 20-40 mJ/cm², yielding 4-log inactivation of and similar reductions for enteric viruses in secondary effluents with transmittance above 60%. treatment, applied at concentrations of 1-5 mg/L for contact times of 5-10 minutes, oxidizes microbial cell walls and nucleic acids, eliminating fecal coliforms with no subsequent regrowth in particle-free streams, outperforming in bromide-rich waters by avoiding harmful byproducts. Such processes ensure compliance with standards, reducing environmental microbial dissemination from industrial outflows. The deployment of antimicrobials in these contexts yields economic advantages through spoilage prevention and operational efficiency. In food systems, antimicrobial packaging extends product shelf life by 20-50%, curbing waste estimated at 1.3 billion tons globally annually and generating savings of up to 10-15% in costs via reduced recalls and discards. Wastewater treatments like UV and , while capital-intensive (e.g., $0.01-0.05 per m³), avert outbreak-linked losses exceeding $10 billion yearly in the U.S. from contaminated releases, with realized through regulatory avoidance and .

Antimicrobial Resistance

Mechanisms of Resistance

Bacterial antimicrobial resistance emerges through biochemical mechanisms that disrupt the drug's ability to inhibit or kill the microbe, often rooted in genetic or acquired genes. Primary pathways include enzymatic inactivation of the agent, alteration of the molecular target to reduce binding affinity, prevention of accumulation via reduced permeability or active efflux, and circumvention of lethality through alternative metabolic routes. These processes are evolutionarily selected under exposure, with genomic sequencing revealing both spontaneous and acquired elements as causal drivers. Enzymatic degradation represents a direct chemical countermeasure, where produce hydrolases or transferases that modify the antimicrobial's structure. Beta-lactamases, for instance, cleave the beta-lactam ring essential to penicillins, cephalosporins, and , preventing cross-linking inhibition. The metallo-beta-lactamase (NDM-1), identified in 2009, exemplifies broad-spectrum hydrolysis, inactivating nearly all beta-lactams except via zinc-dependent catalysis; its gene (bla_{NDM-1}) resides on mobile plasmids, enabling rapid dissemination across like . Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) similarly confer resistance through serine-based hydrolysis, with over 1,000 variants documented via enzymatic kinetics and crystal structures. Target site modifications involve genetic alterations that diminish drug efficacy without fully ablating function, preserving bacterial viability. Ribosomal mutations in 16S rRNA genes reduce binding by altering hydrogen bonding sites, as evidenced by sequencing of resistant isolates showing specific A-site substitutions. For fluoroquinolones, point mutations in (gyrA) and IV (parC) genes decrease quinolone affinity, with double mutants conferring high-level resistance; biochemical assays confirm 10- to 100-fold MIC increases. Efflux pumps, such as the tripartite AcrAB-TolC system in Gram-negatives, actively export diverse substrates using proton motive force, lowering intracellular concentrations below lethal thresholds—genomic knockouts restore susceptibility, verifying causality. Horizontal gene transfer (HGT) accelerates resistance propagation beyond vertical inheritance, with s serving as primary vectors via conjugation. Whole-genome and sequencing of clinical isolates has identified identical resistance cassettes across unrelated species, such as bla_{CTX-M} genes on IncF plasmids shared between E. coli and , implicating and transposons. Empirical curing experiments demonstrate transfer rates up to 10^{-2} per donor cell under selective pressure. However, resistance imposes fitness costs, including reduced replication rates and competitive disadvantages in antibiotic-free environments; a of 84 studies found 70% of single mutations decrease relative fitness by 1-20%, attributable to metabolic burdens or inefficient proteins, though compensatory evolution mitigates this in chronic exposures.

Epidemiology and Global Burden

In 2019, bacterial antimicrobial resistance (AMR) was directly attributable to approximately 1.27 million deaths worldwide, with an additional 4.95 million deaths associated with resistant infections, primarily driven by six key pathogens including Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae.02724-0/fulltext) Lower respiratory infections, bloodstream infections, and intra-abdominal infections accounted for the majority of this burden, with resistance rates varying by pathogen and region but showing consistent empirical increases in prevalence for common Gram-negative bacteria.02724-0/fulltext) Resistance trends indicate rising prevalence in critical pathogens, with surveillance data from 2018 to 2023 revealing increases in over 40% of monitored pathogen-antibiotic combinations, including third-generation cephalosporin-resistant E. coli (median reported rate of 42% across 76 countries) and similar patterns in K. pneumoniae. These empirical shifts reflect annual increments in resistance proportions, though rates vary by setting and antibiotic class, with Gram-negative organisms showing sustained upward trajectories in both and community isolates. The global AMR burden exhibits stark regional disparities, with the highest age-standardized death rates concentrated in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly and , where attributable mortality rates exceed those in high-income regions by factors of 2–10 due to elevated baseline incidences from inadequate , limited diagnostic access, and delayed effective treatments rather than isolated overuse.02724-0/fulltext) 01867-1/fulltext) In contrast, high-income settings report lower impacts, underscoring that resource constraints amplify vulnerability through higher untreated loads. Projections of 10 million annual AMR deaths by 2050, originating from econometric modeling in a 2016 review, rely on assumptions of linear from current trends without robust causal validation against post-2019 empirical , which indicate more modest increases; updated analyses forecast approximately 1.91 million attributable deaths by 2050 under baseline scenarios, emphasizing observable annual rises of 5–10% in resistance prevalence over alarmist modeled endpoints. 01867-1/fulltext) Such estimates highlight the primacy of verifiable incidence over speculative forecasts lacking direct causation from resistance alone.01867-1/fulltext)

Primary Causes and Empirical Evidence

The primary driver of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) emergence is the overuse and misuse of in human medicine, particularly through overprescription for conditions where they provide no benefit, such as viral infections. Audits and pharmacoepidemiologic studies indicate that 30% to 50% of outpatient prescriptions in the United States are unnecessary, with higher rates for acute respiratory infections that are predominantly viral. This excessive prescribing creates widespread sublethal selective pressure, favoring the survival and proliferation of resistant mutants within bacterial populations. Patient non-adherence exacerbates this selection by resulting in incomplete treatment courses, exposing to suboptimal concentrations that promote the of resistance. Subinhibitory levels, often persisting after premature discontinuation, select for de novo resistant mutants with enhanced fitness, as demonstrated in studies where low-dose exposure yielded highly resistant strains. Genomic surveillance provides empirical support for human clinical settings as the dominant source of community-level AMR dissemination. Whole-genome sequencing of pathogens like and reveals that hospital-acquired resistant strains frequently seed community transmission, with nosocomial clusters showing higher genetic similarity to outbreak isolates than to agricultural sources. In contrast, links to agricultural use are empirically weaker; metagenomic analyses of resistomes indicate limited overlap in acquired resistance genes between livestock-associated and human pathogens, with direct transmission pathways accounting for a small fraction of clinical AMR cases. From an evolutionary perspective grounded in selection dynamics, sublethal exposure inevitably drives resistance in any exposed population, yet the net impact of antibiotics remains positive: their introduction has drastically reduced infection-related mortality, with global death rates from treatable bacterial diseases declining substantially despite rising AMR burdens. Historical data show that antibiotic-enabled reductions in mortality from conditions like and outweigh current resistance-attributable deaths, which totaled 1.27 million directly in 2019.

Strategies to Address Resistance

Stewardship and Usage Guidelines

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) consist of coordinated interventions designed to optimize antimicrobial selection, dosage, duration, and to improve clinical outcomes while minimizing , adverse events, and resistance development. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) guidelines, updated in 2016, recommend core elements including leadership commitment, , pharmacy expertise, action through interventions like prospective audit and feedback, reporting of metrics, and . These programs prioritize empirical therapy initiation followed by based on diagnostic results, avoiding unnecessary broad-spectrum agents unless clinically justified. Diagnostic-driven approaches, such as rapid microbial identification and susceptibility testing, enable that reduces reliance on broad-spectrum antimicrobials by 20-30% in hospital settings, as evidenced by meta-analyses of ASP implementations. For instance, integration of multiplex PCR panels or biomarkers like has facilitated shorter durations and narrower spectra without compromising efficacy in and bloodstream infections. Empirical data from randomized trials and cohort studies confirm that such restrictions in controlled environments, including intensive care units, do not increase mortality rates, with systematic reviews reporting stable or reduced all-cause mortality alongside decreased Clostridium difficile infections. While rigid formulary bans or automatic stops can curb overuse, critiques overly prescriptive policies that overlook patient-specific contexts, such as immunocompromised states or polymicrobial infections, potentially leading to undertreatment if not paired with input. IDSA guidelines advocate balanced preauthorization processes reviewed by infectious disease specialists, which achieve utilization reductions comparable to bans but with fewer implementation barriers and sustained adherence. Prospective audit models, allowing case-by-case overrides, have demonstrated equivalent resistance control without excess deaths, underscoring the causal importance of contextual judgment over blanket prohibitions.

Innovation and New Therapies

Recent approvals of novel antibiotics include gepotidacin (Blujepa), the first for uncomplicated urinary tract infections in nearly 30 years, approved by the FDA in March 2025 for females aged 12 and older, targeting tripartite efflux pumps in . Since July 2017, only 13 new antibiotics have gained marketing authorization globally, with just two representing new chemical classes, highlighting a stagnant pipeline now comprising 90 candidates as of 2025, down from 97 in 2023. Bacteriophage therapies, including tailored cocktails, are advancing in clinical trials to address multidrug-resistant infections, particularly those involving . A 2025 proof-of-concept study validated a customized against carbapenem-resistant (CRAB), demonstrating efficacy in bridging preclinical to clinical gaps for targeted bacterial . Phage-antibiotic combinations have shown synergy against over 96% of 153 clinical isolates, including models, by enhancing bacterial killing and reducing resistance emergence. CRISPR-Cas systems are being engineered for antimicrobial applications, primarily in preclinical stages, to disrupt biofilm formation and virulence factors in resistant pathogens. These tools target genes for and antibiotic resistance, with ongoing into CRISPR-bearing phages that selectively kill biofilm-embedded while minimizing tolerance development. As of early 2025, no CRISPR-based antibacterial has entered phase 3 trials, though early candidates like those from Locus Biosciences show promise against Gram-negative pathogens. A notable new class involves (LPS) transport inhibitors, such as Roche's zosurabalpin (RO7075573), a tethered macrocyclic optimized for activity against by trapping LPS in the inner membrane, leading to bacterial toxicity. Preclinical data from demonstrated potent efficacy, with phase 1 trials completed and a phase 3 trial planned for late 2025 or early 2026 to evaluate safety and efficacy in serious infections like and . Pipeline stagnation stems from market failures, including low profitability due to antimicrobial stewardship limiting widespread use and extended regulatory timelines that deter investment, as major firms have exited R&D amid insufficient incentives. These barriers, rather than inherent scientific impossibilities, have reduced novel candidates despite urgent needs, with calls for pull incentives to align development with demands.

Regulatory and Economic Incentives

The Generating Antibiotic Incentives Now (GAIN) Act of 2012 introduced pull incentives through the Qualified Infectious Disease Product (QIDP) designation, administered by the FDA, which qualifies eligible antibacterial and drugs for serious or life-threatening infections for five additional years of market exclusivity beyond standard periods, along with and fast-track options. This mechanism aims to extend effective life and delay generic competition, thereby improving for developers facing constrained markets due to guidelines limiting use. Analysis of QIDP approvals indicates moderate success in spurring interest, with over 100 designations granted by 2023, though many target Gram-positive rather than the more challenging Gram-negative pathogens. Despite these incentives, innovation remains stagnant for Gram-negative antibiotics, with only a handful of new approvals since 2017, including in 2019 for complicated urinary tract infections and , and aztreonam-avibactam (Emblaveo) in February 2025 for complicated intra-abdominal infections caused by resistant strains. Most post-2017 approvals involve combinations of existing agents rather than novel classes effective against priority Gram-negative threats like , highlighting persistent gaps despite QIDP benefits. Empirical data underscore the need for stronger pulls: antibacterial applications from the 2000s exhibit success rates of just 17% over 12 years, a decline of over 50% from 1980s-1990s levels, driven by high clinical failure risks exceeding 90% in late-stage trials compared to broader pharmaceutical averages of 85-90%. Regulatory stringency exacerbates these failures, as FDA requirements for large-scale noninferiority trials in resistant infections yield underpowered studies with elevated Type II errors, inflating costs and deterring investment without commensurate safety gains for low-volume drugs. Incentives favoring market exclusivity extensions without imposed price controls, as in GAIN, better align with causal drivers of underinvestment by permitting developers to capture value through in niche markets, avoiding distortions from subsidies or caps that could further suppress R&D. Post-2017 approval trends, with fewer than five truly Gram-negative agents despite incentives, demonstrate that current frameworks insufficiently counter overregulation's , necessitating delinked rewards or extended exclusivities to sustain pipelines amid 90%+ attrition rates.

Recent Advances and Future Prospects

Novel Antibiotics and Classes (2017–2025)

Since July 2017, 13 new antibiotics have received marketing authorization globally, with only two representing novel chemical classes, addressing gaps in treatments for multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria. These approvals include agents targeting priority Gram-negative pathogens, countering claims of a complete drought through demonstrated efficacy in Phase III trials against carbapenem-resistant (CRE) and other MDR strains. Plazomicin, a semisynthetic approved by the FDA in June 2018 for complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) in adults, exhibits bactericidal activity against MDR , including CRE and colistin-resistant isolates, via reduced enzymatic modification compared to older aminoglycosides. In the EPIC trial, a Phase III noninferiority study, plazomicin achieved 88.1% composite cure rates at days 4-7 post-therapy, comparable to (90.0%), with microbiological eradication rates of 81.1% against baseline pathogens. Its once-daily dosing and renal stability support use in serious infections, though risks necessitate monitoring. Cefiderocol, a siderophore-conjugated approved by the FDA in November 2019 for cUTIs and expanded in 2020 for hospital-acquired/ (HAP/VAP), leverages bacterial iron transport for uptake, enabling activity against MDR Gram-negatives like Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter spp. that resist other beta-lactams. Phase III APEKS-cUTI trial data showed 91.2% success rates versus 58.0% for imipenem-cilastatin in patients with MDR pathogens, including 100% efficacy against CRE. Real-world studies confirm its tolerability in critically ill patients with or , retaining potency against >90% of tested carbapenem-resistant isolates. Other notable approvals include meropenem-vaborbactam (FDA, 2017) for CRE-associated cUTIs and , with Phase III trials demonstrating 98.4% microbiological success versus 94.2% for piperacillin-tazobactam; and imipenem-cilastatin-relebactam (FDA, 2019; EU, 2020) for MDR Gram-negative infections, showing 71% clinical cure in RESTORE-IMI trials against colistin-nonsusceptible . By 2024, additional agents like (FDA, April 2024) expanded options for uncomplicated UTIs, with efficacy against >95% of E. coli isolates, including some ESBL-producers. These developments, while limited in novel scaffolds, provide targeted therapies for Gram-negative gaps in and , with ongoing surveillance affirming retained susceptibility in MDR contexts.

Alternative Approaches and Technologies

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) represents a key microbiome modulation strategy to counteract antibiotic-induced dysbiosis, particularly in recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), where it restores microbial diversity and competitively inhibits pathogen recolonization. Randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses report FMT achieving sustained resolution rates of 80-95% for recurrent CDI, compared to 20-40% with repeated vancomycin alone, with a 2024 review confirming reductions in recurrence by up to 90% in real-world applications when using screened donor stool. This approach leverages causal restoration of bile acid-metabolizing taxa like Clostridium scindens, which suppress C. difficile toxin production, as evidenced by preclinical models linking microbiota composition to infection susceptibility. Host-directed therapies (HDTs) target innate immune pathways to bolster antimicrobial defenses without directly killing pathogens, addressing resistance by enhancing host resilience rather than relying on antibiotics prone to evasion. For instance, supplementation modulates cathelicidin production and reduces pro-inflammatory cytokines, with observational cohort studies from 2016-2023 associating serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels above 30 ng/mL with 20-50% lower risks of severe bacterial infections, including those involving multidrug-resistant strains like . Randomized trials in patients have shown adjunctive accelerating clearance and improving clinical scores by 15-30%, independent of antibiotic efficacy, though causality requires further validation beyond correlations observed in deficient populations. Nanotechnology-based delivery systems improve penetration into and intracellular niches, circumventing resistance mechanisms like efflux pumps through targeted, sustained release. Preclinical studies using liposomal or polymeric nanoparticles loaded with demonstrate 2-10-fold enhanced eradication in Staphylococcus aureus models, with causal evidence from assays showing improved intracellular uptake in macrophages via size-dependent (particles 50-200 nm). These carriers reduce minimum inhibitory concentrations by 4-16 times in resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains, as quantified in murine models, though translation remains limited to phase I safety data as of 2023.

Controversies and Debates

Overuse in vs. Agricultural Settings

Antimicrobial overuse in medicine and both contribute to resistance, but pharmacoepidemiologic and genomic data indicate that human prescribing practices, particularly for community-acquired infections, are the primary driver for the majority of clinically relevant strains affecting humans. Modeling studies estimate that eliminating human antibiotic use would reduce human colonization with resistant by approximately 33%, compared to only a 3.1% reduction in animal colonization from ceasing veterinary use, highlighting limited spillover and greater self-containment within human reservoirs. Genomic tracing of resistance genes in human pathogens, such as extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing , often reveals origins in clinical and outpatient settings rather than direct veterinary transmission, with human gut microbiomes serving as major reservoirs amplified by frequent, low-selectivity prescriptions. In contrast, agricultural antibiotic use, while substantial in volume—estimated at roughly twice global human consumption in some expert assessments—is increasingly restricted by withdrawal periods that minimize residues in food products, limiting direct human exposure via consumption. However, only about 5% of veterinary s globally are classified as highest-priority critically important for human medicine, reducing overlap with key therapeutic classes. Empirical evidence from interventions challenges claims of dominant agricultural causality: Denmark's 1998 ban on growth-promoting s in halved overall veterinary use but failed to decrease resistance in zoonotic pathogens like and relevant to humans, with some resistances, such as , persisting or rising in human cases due to shifts toward therapeutic dosing. Similarly, broader EU reductions in veterinary antimicrobials since 2006, including bans on certain classes, have not correlated with proportional declines in human rates, as community-level resistances driven by outpatient human prescriptions continue unabated.
SettingKey Use CharacteristicsEvidence of Resistance Contribution to Humans
Human Medicine~70-80% of resistance in strains traces to prescribing (e.g., outpatient for respiratory infections); direct selection in patients.Primary driver for non-zoonotic pathogens; bans/reductions in vet use show minimal impact.
Higher volume but regulated (e.g., sales down 28% from 2018-2022); withdrawal periods limit food-chain transfer.Contributes to zoonotics (e.g., via /environment); Denmark ban reduced animal resistance but not human zoonotic levels.
While veterinary overuse facilitates environmental dissemination and zoonotic transfer for specific pathogens, the persistence of human resistance post-agricultural restrictions underscores that curbing medical overuse—where empirical tracing attributes over 70% of origins in prevalent human strains—remains essential for addressing community burdens. Balanced must prioritize human sectors, as disproportionate focus on farms overlooks causal realities from direct-use pharmacoepidemiology.

Hygiene Hypothesis and Potential Harms of Reduced Use

The posits that diminished exposure to microorganisms in early life, including through use, contributes to the rising incidence of allergic and autoimmune diseases by impairing maturation. Early-life exposure disrupts the gut , reducing microbial diversity and altering immune responses, which observational studies link to increased risks of conditions like and eczema. Meta-analyses of cohort studies indicate that infants receiving antibiotics in the first year of life face approximately 20-30% higher odds of developing , with adjusted odds ratios ranging from 1.2 to 1.5 depending on exposure frequency and timing. This association persists after controlling for confounders like birth mode and , supporting a causal role for antibiotic-induced in Th2-skewed immune dysregulation rather than reverse causation from illness prompting treatment. Antibiotic-driven microbiome alterations extend beyond allergies to , where reduced bacterial diversity correlates with impaired regulatory T-cell development and heightened inflammatory responses. Experimental models and human studies demonstrate that broad-spectrum deplete short-chain fatty acid-producing , leading to epithelial barrier dysfunction and systemic immune priming that exacerbates diseases like and . Longitudinal cohort data from birth reveal that multiple early courses double the risk of later autoimmune markers, underscoring as a mechanistic bridge between antimicrobial exposure and chronic immune . While these overuse harms highlight risks of indiscriminate application, antibiotics have demonstrably reduced infection-related mortality, such as cutting childhood deaths by over 50% since the through targeted interventions. Absolute reductions or bans risk reversing these gains, potentially increasing acute morbidity in vulnerable populations, as evidenced by historical pre-antibiotic eras with infection fatality rates exceeding 20-30% for common bacterial illnesses. Selective, time-limited use—guided by diagnostics and confined to confirmed infections—minimizes in longitudinal studies, preserving resilience without forgoing life-saving benefits. Overzealous curtailment, ignoring this trade-off, overlooks causal evidence that judicious dosing restores microbial equilibrium faster than blanket avoidance, which may inadvertently heighten infection burdens in high-risk settings.

Regulatory Barriers to Development

The stringent regulatory requirements imposed by agencies like the U.S. (FDA) have contributed to a marked decline in antimicrobial innovation, with approvals dropping from approximately 20% of new drugs in 1980 to just 6% over the subsequent four decades. This empirical slowdown correlates with heightened post-1962 standards emphasizing large-scale, randomized controlled trials, which amplify development risks and timelines for compared to other pharmaceuticals. Phase III trials, in particular, demand extensive patient enrollment—often thousands for non-inferiority designs—and drive costs upward, with total preclinical-to-approval expenses averaging $1.2 billion per , dominated by clinical phases exceeding $900 million in aggregate. Antibiotics face disproportionately low approval success rates relative to chronic therapies, frequently relying on smaller, surrogate-endpoint non-inferiority studies rather than superiority trials, yet still encountering rigorous scrutiny that heightens probabilities. The pipeline for Gram-negative-targeting agents remains stagnant despite escalating resistance threats, with only limited candidates advancing amid these barriers, as evidenced by fewer than 100 antibacterials in clinical development as of 2023, many not addressing critical Gram-negative pathogens innovatively. Regulatory stringency exacerbates economic disincentives, including liability for post-approval resistance emergence and restricted via stewardship guidelines that curtail usage volumes, rendering returns insufficient to offset the $1 billion-plus threshold. To mitigate these hurdles without compromising efficacy validation, experts advocate streamlined trial designs incorporating from pragmatic studies, such as those for hospital-acquired , which could leverage broader inclusion criteria and existing data sources to reduce Phase III burdens. Such adaptations address causal misalignments in current frameworks, where high fixed costs and short-duration therapies yield poor return profiles, but require balancing accelerated pathways against verifiable safety data to sustain causal confidence in approvals. Over 82% of FDA approvals occurred before 2000, underscoring the need for targeted reforms to revive pipelines without diluting empirical standards.

References

  1. https://www.cdc.gov/narms/glossary/index.html
  2. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/antimicrobial-resistance
  3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7986/
  4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3911012/
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6604941/
  6. https://www.who.int/news/item/13-10-2025-who-warns-of-widespread-resistance-to-common-antibiotics-worldwide
  7. https://www.cdc.gov/antimicrobial-resistance/data-research/facts-stats/index.html
  8. https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/GO.23.00146
  9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8459052/
  10. https://www.worldatlas.com/ancient-world/egyptians-anticipated-antibiotics-by-millinia-by-using-moldy-bread.html
  11. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/10/nyregion/secrets-of-the-mummys-medicine-chest.html
  12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3941901/
  13. https://askabiologist.asu.edu/explore/antibiotics-bacteria
  14. https://staywellcopper.com/blogs/blog/the-history-of-copper-as-an-antimicrobial-agent
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9033467/
  16. https://wounds-uk.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ccb2d7179b300e517aee7c0782ec5745.pdf
  17. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5395836_Paul_Ehrlich_Founder_of_chemotherapy
  18. https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/87453
  19. https://www.jameslindlibrary.org/articles/the-introduction-of-chemotherapy-using-arsphenamine-the-first-magic-bullet/
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4317402/
  21. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51525414_One_Hundred_Years_of_Salvarsan
  22. https://www.acs.org/education/whatischemistry/landmarks/flemingpenicillin.html
  23. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4520913/
  24. https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/science-blog/penicillin-oxford-story
  25. https://www.sciencehistory.org/education/scientific-biographies/howard-walter-florey-and-ernst-boris-chain/
  26. https://www.gideononline.com/blogs/penicillin/
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3673487/
  28. https://www.cdc.gov/tb/webcourses/tb101/page5212.html
  29. https://academic.oup.com/jac/article/71/3/572/2364412
  30. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC99026/
  31. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK535454/
  32. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9558427/
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3091383/
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4378521/
  35. https://magazine.publichealth.jhu.edu/2025/brief-history-antibiotic-resistance
  36. https://www.who.int/news/item/14-06-2024-who-releases-report-on-state-of-development-of-antibacterials
  37. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/compilation-cder-new-molecular-entity-nme-drug-and-new-biologic-approvals
  38. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12159177/
  39. https://www.apec.org/docs/default-source/publications/2024/3/224_hwg_-gap-analysis-of-economic-incentives-for-antimicrobials-in-apec-economies.pdf?sfvrsn=3d4c4afa_2
  40. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2824%2901867-1/fulltext
  41. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK216522/
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7851017/
  43. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK363143/
  44. https://safetec.com/blog/blog/what-is-the-difference-between-antiseptic-and-antibiotic/
  45. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8995183/
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10340576/
  47. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK535443/
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11434382/
  49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9104849/
  50. https://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/infectious-diseases/bacteria-and-antibacterial-medications/overview-of-antibacterial-medications
  51. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-15405-1
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7173549/
  53. https://www.cdc.gov/antimicrobial-resistance/about/index.html
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9253063/
  55. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK594998/
  56. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-66193-9
  57. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2666503
  58. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5672523/
  59. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article-abstract/32/Supplement_1/S9/298541
  60. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5905615/
  61. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/38/6/864/320723
  62. https://www.idstewardship.com/basics-bactericidal-versus-bacteriostatic-antibiotics/
  63. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK545311/
  64. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6151903/
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4968164/
  66. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11417732/
  67. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5008060/
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9953508/
  69. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4888811/
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC89199/
  71. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/ecosalplus.esp-0002-2018
  72. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/aac.01207-19
  73. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3996373/
  74. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC88922/
  75. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538168/
  76. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9636868/
  77. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1198743X15300537
  78. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/aac.44.9.2310-2318.2000
  79. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/35/4/359/566684
  80. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa020191
  81. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7277767/
  82. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/46/1/120/335857
  83. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12205959/
  84. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6135714/
  85. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7975490/
  86. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7149618/
  87. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2827545
  88. https://journals.lww.com/md-journal/fulltext/2016/09130/cross_sectional_study_of_virological_failure_and.62.aspx
  89. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1105633
  90. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5610408/
  91. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/hcp/antivirals/summary-clinicians.html
  92. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2824%2901307-2/fulltext
  93. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10262060/
  94. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2937809/
  95. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00018-016-2299-6
  96. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2871161/
  97. https://academic.oup.com/ve/article/10/1/veae001/7511244
  98. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK544251/
  99. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8147684/
  100. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2778258/
  101. https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/artemisinin-resistance
  102. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2020.00784/full
  103. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471492220302543
  104. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3953020/
  105. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30882380/
  106. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X%2824%2900043-3/fulltext
  107. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7321683/
  108. https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0012312
  109. https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0011250
  110. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S022352342300805X
  111. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC88911/
  112. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/chlorhexidine
  113. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11908-025-00865-z
  114. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12188002/
  115. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK574540/
  116. https://www.news-medical.net/health/What-is-Triclosan-and-Why-is-it-Banned.aspx
  117. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/12/5/5657
  118. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969723007301
  119. https://www.cfsph.iastate.edu/Disinfection/Assets/Disinfection101.pdf
  120. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7134755/
  121. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S019665530300806X
  122. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11536992/
  123. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11227450/
  124. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7844811/
  125. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-microbiology/chapter/using-physical-methods-to-control-microorganisms/
  126. https://microbenotes.com/physical-methods-of-sterilization/
  127. https://www.jove.com/science-education/v/19518/physical-methods-for-controlling-microbial-growth-temperature
  128. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12031847/
  129. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221929421_Sterilization_by_Gamma_Irradiation
  130. https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/11/1/91
  131. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341429445_Effects_of_Water_Activity_a_w_on_Microbial_Stability_as_a_Hurdle_in_Food_Preservation
  132. https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Microbiology/Microbiology_%28Boundless%29/06%253A_Culturing_Microorganisms/6.14%253A_Physical_Antimicrobial_Control/6.14F%253A_Osmotic_Pressure
  133. https://www.thoughtco.com/why-does-salt-work-as-preservative-607428
  134. https://www.nelsonlabs.com/gibraltar-archives/d-values-measurement-of-the-resistance-of-a-microbial-population-to-destruction-by-gamma-irradiation-or-chemical-agents/
  135. https://www.oaepublish.com/articles/mrr.2025.31
  136. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11529433/
  137. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-025-03678-8
  138. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8761470/
  139. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2021.630695/full
  140. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7616364/
  141. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5622393/
  142. https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1127&context=sss
  143. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3067274/
  144. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8951143/
  145. https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/24/11/2130
  146. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/AEM.03608-12
  147. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S240585722200119X
  148. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537025002421
  149. https://www.nature.com/articles/ja201730
  150. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1105880
  151. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4358713/
  152. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-51711-x
  153. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857923000705
  154. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2801197
  155. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/62/10/e51/2462846
  156. https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/antimicrobial-resistance/timeline-fda-action-antimicrobial-resistance
  157. https://www.fda.gov/media/159544/download
  158. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4078264/
  159. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0032579123007976
  160. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7721588/
  161. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352771423001672
  162. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1170426/full
  163. https://apsjournals.apsnet.org/doi/10.1094/PHYTO-10-23-0357-IA
  164. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8389036/
  165. https://www.ippc.int/en/resources/publications/antimicrobial-resistance-and-chemical-use-in-plants/
  166. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/guidance-industry-antimicrobial-food-additives
  167. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11281112/
  168. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sustainable-food-systems/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1307210/full
  169. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9951980/
  170. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2015/165257
  171. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969724003358
  172. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-10/ultraviolet-disinfection-guidance-manual-2006.pdf
  173. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-06/documents/ozon.pdf
  174. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.3c00802
  175. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10536795/
  176. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-06/documents/uv.pdf
  177. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/evaluating-the-economic-benefits-and-costs-of-antimicrobial-use-in-food-producing-animals_f859f644-en.html
  178. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4888801/
  179. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11362070/
  180. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11024256/
  181. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8773413/
  182. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10881300/
  183. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54459-9
  184. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4380921/
  185. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11019082/
  186. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10612146/
  187. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5127510/
  188. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9307097/
  189. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2518263
  190. https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/media/releases/2016/p0503-unnecessary-prescriptions.html
  191. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4034545/
  192. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:759386/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  193. https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13756-025-01553-2
  194. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aar3777
  195. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9765467/
  196. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/msystems.00775-22
  197. https://ourworldindata.org/antibiotics
  198. https://www.idsociety.org/practice-guideline/implementing-an-ASP/
  199. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9949764/
  200. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092485792300095X
  201. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/68/5/748/5047380
  202. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10163585/
  203. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/how-should-we-think-about-clinicians-individual-antibiotic-stewardship-duties/2024-06
  204. https://www.thelancet.com/article/S1473-3099%2822%2900832-5/fulltext
  205. https://www.ajmc.com/view/fda-approves-first-new-class-of-oral-antibiotics-for-uncomplicated-utis-in-nearly-30-years
  206. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964%2825%2900386-X/fulltext
  207. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-53994-9
  208. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11257871/
  209. https://www.genesispub.org/crispr-cas-systems-transformative-precision-tools-to-combat-antimicrobial-resistance-in-multidrug-resistant-gram-negative-pathogens
  210. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06873-0
  211. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/antimicrobial-stewardship/roche-launch-phase-3-trial-new-antibiotic-targeting-acinetobacter
  212. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medical-technology/articles/10.3389/fmedt.2023.1010247/full
  213. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44259-025-00096-1
  214. https://www.fda.gov/media/148480/download
  215. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10677251/
  216. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11892437/
  217. https://news.abbvie.com/2025-02-07-U-S-FDA-Approves-EMBLAVEO-TM-aztreonam-and-avibactam-for-the-Treatment-of-Adults-With-Complicated-Intra-Abdominal-Infections-With-Limited-or-No-Treatment-Options
  218. https://www.mdpi.com/2079-6382/14/10/997
  219. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/73/11/e4444/5862690
  220. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9293739/
  221. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44259-025-00123-1
  222. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMhle1002961
  223. https://www.labiotech.eu/trends-news/antibiotic-development-landscape/
  224. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10160915/
  225. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11906701/
  226. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1801467
  227. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9784334/
  228. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2022.896971/full
  229. https://accp1.org/Members/ACCP1/5Publications_and_News/FDA-Approves-FETROJA-Treatment-UTI-Patients-18-Years-Older.aspx
  230. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11490232/
  231. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/health/fda-urinary-tract-infection-antibiotic.html
  232. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9765331/
  233. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2481003
  234. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1374774/full
  235. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7164794/
  236. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6798578/
  237. https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/3/3/ofw151/2593293
  238. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01209/full
  239. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9953167/
  240. https://www.mdpi.com/2624-845X/6/2/9
  241. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928098723001458
  242. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352771421000100
  243. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4063852/
  244. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/24914/chapter/4
  245. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1503141112
  246. https://healthforanimals.org/animal-health-in-data/antimicrobial-resistance/animal-health-and-amr/
  247. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1369527414000678
  248. https://www.choicesmagazine.org/choices-magazine/submitted-articles/lessons-from-the-danish-ban-on-feed-grade-antibiotics
  249. https://agbioforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/AgBioForum_3_23_148.pdf
  250. https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/publications/veterinary-antimicrobials-in-europes-environment-a-one-health-perspective
  251. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2937522/
  252. https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/127/6/1125/30065/Prenatal-or-Early-Life-Exposure-to-Antibiotics-and
  253. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8661061/
  254. https://aacijournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13223-023-00773-8
  255. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-87981-7
  256. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568997222001100
  257. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6300652/
  258. https://academic.oup.com/femsre/article/42/4/489/5045017
  259. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cellular-and-infection-microbiology/articles/10.3389/fcimb.2020.572912/full
  260. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2607/13/3/602
  261. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9969474/
  262. https://genomemedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13073-020-00782-x
  263. https://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.org/article/S1198-743X%2814%2961330-6/fulltext
  264. https://bmjmedicine.bmj.com/content/1/1/e000227
  265. https://ctti-clinicaltrials.org/about/ctti-projects/abdd-habp-vabp-studies/
  266. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S096808961630640X
  267. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/report-highlights-fragile-and-failing-antibiotic-pipeline
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.