Dear Sir, We read with interest the paper of Boman about antibacterial peptides [1]. It is an excellent and complete review and although the pharmaceutical value of these antibacterial peptides is still to be fully established, we think that there is no doubt that these compounds represent one of the most innovative families of anti-infective agents that have been characterized over the last 25 years. In this letter, we report additional informations about clinical development of these antimicrobial peptides, particularly about the cationic antimicrobial peptides [2, 3]. In fact, these compounds are emerging as ‘veritable’ drugs with several potential applications in future clinical practice. At present, several cationic antimicrobial peptides are being investigated or have completed phase III clinical trials, in topical and/or parenteral use. Our biotechnology company Entomed SA has characterized over 175 novel molecules from around 100 different species of insects (http://www.entomed.com). These compounds are already resulting in promising lead compounds being taken forward into clinical development. One example, ETD151, an antifungal 44 amino acid peptide, variant of a natural peptide from lepidopteran Heliothis virescens, is now in advanced preclinical development for the treatment of life-threatening invasive fungal infections (Table 1) [2]. Other lead compounds are based on native defensin peptides, from a variety of insect species, which have been modified to improve their biological profiles against Gram-positive bacteria. No conflict of interest was declared.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andrès et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: