Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Trials: Clinical Trials are Essential for Testing New Approaches to Combat the Rise of AMR

Abstract

Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) is a critical global health emergency, projected to cause millions of deaths and incur a massive economic toll, driven by the stagnant pipeline of traditional antibiotics. Clinical trials are the essential and rate-limiting step for translating promising research into effective therapies, but they face unprecedented scientific, regulatory, and economic challenges. Traditional non-inferiority trials are often impractical for narrow-spectrum agents targeting highly resistant organisms, necessitating the adoption of adaptive and streamlined clinical designs like the LPAD pathway and platform trials. Furthermore, the development of non-traditional therapies, including bacteriophage cocktails, antivirulence agents, and immunotherapies, requires entirely novel trial endpoints and regulatory clarity. The persistent market failure, characterized by low financial returns, must be addressed through substantial 'pull' economic incentives (e.g., subscription models) and robust global collaborations to fund and harmonize trial efforts across high-burden settings. Ultimately, overcoming the AMR crisis hinges on the rapid innovation of clinical trial methodologies alongside the commitment to global investment, ensuring new approaches are rigorously tested and made accessible to preserve modern medicine.

Keywords

Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), Clinical Trials, Bacteriophage Therapy, Drug Development Pipeline, Economic Incentives, Adaptive Trial Design

Introduction

Scientific and Regulatory Challenges in Novel Antibiotic Trials

The development of new antimicrobial agents is critically impeded by a unique set of challenges encountered during the clinical trial phase, driven by the epidemiology of resistant infections and the conventional regulatory paradigms. These hurdles necessitate innovative methodologies and adaptive regulatory foresight to successfully shepherd new drugs to market.

Difficulties in Trial Design for Resistant Infections

The design of late-stage (Phase III) clinical trials for novel antibiotics is inherently complex, primarily due to the ethical and statistical constraints posed by the urgent clinical need. The core challenge revolves around selecting an appropriate comparative model:

• Non-Inferiority (NI) Trials vs. Superiority Trials:

Traditional antibiotic trials are often structured as Non-Inferiority (NI) studies, aiming to prove that a new agent is not worse than a current standard of care (SOC) by a small, pre-specified margin. This design is statistically less demanding, requiring a large sample size of patients typically infected with susceptible organisms. However, NI trials fail to demonstrate a significant clinical advantage—a major shortcoming for a drug intended to combat resistant strains. Conversely, Superiority Trials, which are necessary to prove a new drug is better than the SOC, require a much smaller population of patients with confirmed drug-resistant infections. This population is difficult to enroll (as detailed below), making superiority trials costly, lengthy, and often statistically underpowered for rare resistance patterns.

• Defining an Appropriate and Ethical Control Arm:

The ethical imperative to provide effective treatment to patients with life-threatening infections severely restricts the use of placebo-controlled trials. In the context of drug-resistant infections, the standard of care (SOC) control arm is problematic. For a multi-drug resistant (MDR) organism like carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae, the available SOC might be suboptimal or highly toxic, complicating the interpretation of results if the novel drug shows modest benefit. Conversely, if a highly effective SOC exists for the susceptible population, demonstrating non-inferiority or superiority can be statistically elusive, especially given the high overall cure rates of existing effective therapies.

Patient Recruitment and Diagnostics

Successful antibiotic trials depend on the timely identification and enrollment of patients infected with the specific target pathogens. For agents designed to treat resistance, this process introduces significant logistical and technological barriers:

• Rarity and Heterogeneity of Resistant Pathogens:

Infections caused by rare, specific drug-resistant pathogens, such as Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) or pan-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, are sporadic and geographically heterogeneous. Enrolling a sufficient number of patients with these confirmed, often critically life-threatening infections is immensely challenging, frequently requiring costly, multi-national, and multi-center collaborations. Delays in enrollment translate directly into prolonged and expensive development timelines.

• The Critical Need for Rapid Diagnostics (POCD):

Empirical antibiotic therapy—treatment initiated before culture results are available—is standard clinical practice but can severely confound trial outcomes. To ensure the new drug is tested against the intended resistant pathogen, trials require rapid, high-quality Point-of-Care Diagnostics (POCD) that can confirm the identity and resistance profile of the causative organism quickly (ideally within hours). Current gold-standard culture methods often take $48–72$ hours, delaying randomization and leading to the exclusion of eligible patients or the introduction of therapeutic confounding factors. The lack of integrated, validated diagnostic tools remains a major hurdle for precision enrollment in AMR trials.

Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) Optimization

Establishing the optimal dosing regimen is critical for maximizing efficacy and minimizing toxicity and the potential for new resistance development. This step is particularly challenging in the target population for new antibiotics—critically ill patients:

• Altered Physiology in Critical Illness:

Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) often exhibit profound physiological derangements, including altered fluid status, systemic inflammation, and changes in cardiac output. These conditions can significantly impact drug disposition, leading to highly variable antibiotic concentrations. A notable challenge is Augmented Renal Clearance (ARC), where hyperfiltration in young, septic patients can lead to sub-therapeutic drug levels, increasing the risk of treatment failure and promoting resistance.

• The Dosing Challenge:

Determining the appropriate dose requires sophisticated PK/PD modeling, often moving beyond simple concentration thresholds to time-dependent metrics. The necessity to rapidly achieve and maintain therapeutic drug concentrations without causing host toxicity mandates a reliance on early Phase I/II studies that may employ Adaptive Trial Designs. These designs allow for pre-specified adjustments to dosing, patient population, or sample size based on interim PK/PD data, thereby optimizing the final Phase III dose and improving the probability of success.

Regulatory Adaptation (e.g., LPAD, GAIN Act)

Recognizing the severity of the pipeline crisis, regulatory bodies have introduced mechanisms to streamline the development pathway for critically needed antimicrobials:

• Limited Population Pathway for Antibacterial and Antifungal Drugs (LPAD):

Enacted by the U.S. FDA, the LPAD pathway aims to expedite the approval of new antibiotics intended to treat serious or life-threatening infections in a limited or unmet-need patient population. It allows for approval based on smaller clinical datasets and non-traditional endpoints, provided the drug addresses a clear public health threat. While it offers a faster path, it requires clear labeling indicating the limited patient population, which can impact subsequent commercial viability.

• Generating Antibiotic Incentives Now (GAIN Act):

This U.S. legislation provides Qualified Infectious Disease Product (QIDP) designation to certain antibiotics, granting five additional years of market exclusivity. The GAIN Act serves primarily as a regulatory incentive by extending the profitable market lifespan of an approved drug, rather than changing the trial methodology itself. This is crucial for improving the return-on-investment calculation for pharmaceutical companies, although it does not fully solve the fundamental market failure issue.

• Impact on Trial Feasibility:

These adaptations, particularly LPAD, are essential for improving trial feasibility for narrow-spectrum or resistance-targeted agents that cannot ethically or practically meet the sample size requirements of broad-spectrum NI trials. However, a significant gap remains in harmonizing these flexible regulatory standards across major global jurisdictions (e.g., U.S., E.U., Japan) to facilitate truly global and efficient clinical development programs. ^[13-17]

Clinical Trials for Non-Traditional Antimicrobial Approaches

The diminishing efficacy of conventional small-molecule antibiotics has catalyzed the clinical exploration of non-traditional antimicrobial modalities. These agents, which often bypass or circumvent classical resistance mechanisms, necessitate radical rethinking of clinical trial design, standardization, and regulatory endpoints.

Bacteriophage Therapy Trials

The clinical re-emergence of Bacteriophage (Phage) Therapy—the use of naturally occurring viruses that selectively kill bacteria—represents a significant paradigm shift. Phages offer a potential precision medicine approach, particularly against complex, drug-resistant infections.

• Emerging Clinical Data and Compassionate Use:

Current clinical evidence largely stems from Phase I/II safety and pharmacokinetic studies, often supplemented by compelling, though less rigorous, compassionate use or "n-of-1" cases involving critically ill patients with infections recalcitrant to all licensed antibiotics. These cases, while impactful, do not constitute the necessary evidence base for standard regulatory approval.

• Challenges in Quality Control and Standardization:

A major hurdle in scaling phage therapy is the standardization of the therapeutic agent. Unlike a single-chemical entity, phage preparations are often 'phage cocktails' comprising multiple viruses tailored to a specific bacterial strain. Clinical trials must establish robust Quality Control (QC) metrics, including phage purity, titer, stability, lytic activity spectrum, and the absence of harmful endotoxins or lysogenic capability.

• Regulatory Frameworks for Personalized Medicine:

The inherent variability and personalized nature of phage application challenge existing regulatory frameworks designed for mass-produced pharmaceuticals. Regulatory agencies must adapt to a model that allows for the rapid testing and deployment of tailored agents against individual patient infections, potentially utilizing master protocols for broad host-range components combined with fast-track approval for patient-specific additions.

Antivirulence Agents and Host-Targeting Therapies

A distinct non-traditional strategy involves developing agents that do not directly kill the pathogen (non-bactericidal) but instead disarm its ability to cause disease. This approach reduces the selective pressure for resistance development.

• Mechanisms and Targets:

Clinical trials are investigating agents that target specific virulence factors, such as biofilm inhibitors (preventing bacterial colonization), quorum-sensing inhibitors (disrupting coordinated bacterial behavior), and toxin neutralizers (e.g., monoclonal antibodies targeting C. difficile or Staphylococcus aureus toxins).

• Divergent Primary Endpoints:

A crucial difference in the clinical development of these agents is the need for novel primary endpoints. Traditional antibiotic trials focus on Microbiological Eradication (bacterial clearance from the infection site) or Clinical Cure (resolution of signs and symptoms). Antivirulence agents, however, may not clear the bacteria but instead reduce disease severity. Therefore, clinical trial endpoints must shift to include metrics like reduction in organ damage, duration of hospitalization, attenuation of the inflammatory response, or all-cause mortality, irrespective of microbiological clearance. This requires consensus on novel, validated clinical outcome assessment tools.

Antimicrobial Peptides (AMPs) and Immunotherapies

This category encompasses both direct-acting agents with novel mechanisms and host-directed prophylactic strategies.

• Antimicrobial Peptides (AMPs):

AMPs are host-defense molecules with broad-spectrum activity, often targeting the bacterial membrane. While promising preclinical data exists, clinical translation faces severe challenges related to toxicity, stability, and delivery. Clinical trials must meticulously address the relatively narrow therapeutic window of many AMPs, balancing effective dosing with risks of systemic toxicity (e.g., nephrotoxicity) and rapid degradation by host proteases. Novel delivery systems (e.g., liposomes, sustained-release formulations) are a key focus of current Phase I/II clinical research.

• Anti-AMR Vaccines and Immunotherapies:

The prophylactic use of vaccines against high-priority pathogens (e.g., Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Clostridioides difficile toxins) offers a population-level solution to reduce infection incidence and, consequently, antibiotic use. Clinical trials for these vaccines are extensive, requiring large Phase III cohorts to demonstrate efficacy in preventing infection or disease severity. Other immunotherapies, such as therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, are being tested in trials to enhance host defenses against specific drug-resistant infections, focusing on reducing bacterial load and clinical failure rates.

Drug Repurposing and Novel Combination Trials

To accelerate the availability of new treatments, research is focused on utilizing existing clinical assets in new ways.

• Drug Repurposing:

This involves testing existing, approved non-antibiotic drugs (e.g., certain anti-inflammatories, antifungals, or anti-cancer agents) for intrinsic antimicrobial activity or as resistance-modifying agents. Clinical trials in this space benefit from established safety profiles (Phase I data), allowing for a faster transition to Phase II efficacy studies. The primary challenge remains achieving therapeutic concentrations at the infection site without compromising the patient's existing therapeutic regimen.

• Novel Combination Regimens:

The development of agents that restore the efficacy of older antibiotics is a critical strategy. The clinical success of β-lactam β-lactamase inhibitor (BL-BLI) combinations (e.g., Ceftazidime-avibactam) exemplifies this. Current trials are focused on discovering and clinically validating new inhibitors against emerging resistance enzymes (e.g., metallo-β-lactamases) or new combinations with non-antibiotic drugs to inhibit efflux pumps or other resistance mechanisms. These trials must carefully manage the dose of both the novel resistance inhibitor and the partner antibiotic, requiring detailed two-drug PK/PD modeling in the target patient population. ^[18-22]

Challenges and Future Perspectives

Despite the scientific and regulatory innovations observed in antimicrobial clinical trials, the path to a sustainable and robust pipeline remains encumbered by economic barriers and an urgent need for global collaborative frameworks. Addressing these challenges requires a concerted, multi-sectoral strategy that leverages both financial instruments and technological advancements.

The Market Failure and Economic Incentives

The primary existential threat to antimicrobial R&D is the profound market failure. New antibiotics, by design, must be used judiciously to preserve their efficacy, leading to low sales volumes and a protracted period to achieve a return on the substantial R&D investment (often exceeding $1 billion per drug). This low Return on Investment (ROI) drives pharmaceutical companies, particularly large innovators, to exit the field.

• The Commercial Viability Challenge:

The fundamental disconnect is that the public health value of an antibiotic (its ability to underpin modern medicine) vastly exceeds its private commercial value (its sales revenue). Traditional 'push' funding (grants, tax breaks) assists early-stage discovery but fails to address the high costs and risks of late-stage clinical development (Phase II and III).

• The Potential of 'Pull' Incentives:

The future hinges on implementing 'Pull' incentives, financial mechanisms that reward successful development and regulatory approval, effectively de-risking the high-cost clinical phase. Key models include:

Market Entry Rewards (MERs): Large, lump-sum payments (e.g., $1–3 billion) granted upon regulatory approval of a critically needed antibiotic, decoupling the reward from sales volume. This allows the drug to be used conservatively while ensuring developer compensation.

Subscription Models (Delinkage): Government-backed systems, such as the pilot programs launched in the UK and Sweden, where health systems pay a fixed annual fee for access to an antibiotic, regardless of the volume used. This delinks profitability from prescribing volume, solving the inherent market conflict. Clinical trials must now consider how to effectively link their successful outcomes to eligibility for these financial rewards.

Adaptive and Platform Trial Designs

The inefficiencies and high costs of traditional Phase III trials necessitate a shift toward more flexible and patient-centric designs that maximize data yield.

• Adaptive Designs for Efficiency:

Adaptive trial designs allow for pre-specified modifications to a trial's course (e.g., dose adjustments, sample size recalculation, stopping for futility/success) based on accumulating interim data. This flexibility is crucial in AMR, where patient populations are heterogeneous and data on new agents are limited. It enhances the probability of trial success while minimizing patient exposure to ineffective doses or control arms.

• Platform and Basket Trials:

The future of AMR clinical research lies in platform trials, which utilize a single, continuous master protocol to simultaneously evaluate multiple drug candidates against a common infectious disease (e.g., hospital-acquired pneumonia). This approach, exemplified by initiatives like the IMI-funded COMBACTE-NET, allows for the rapid addition or removal of treatment arms without restarting the entire infrastructure. Basket trials similarly allow a single drug to be tested across various infection types, streamlining the pathway for broad-spectrum agents. These models address the issue of rare, resistant infections by aggregating patient cohorts under a single efficient structure.

Global Collaboration and One Health Integration

AMR is a global threat demanding a unified, collaborative response that transcends national borders and sectoral silos.

• Harmonizing International Efforts:

Organizations like the WHO and the Global Antibiotic Research and Development Partnership (GARDP) are essential for establishing international clinical networks and harmonizing regulatory protocols. This is critical for conducting trials in regions with a high burden of resistance, where patient enrollment is faster and more representative of the global problem. The development of standardized data collection and protocol templates can significantly reduce costs and accelerate drug development timelines.

• The One Health Imperative:

Effective AMR containment requires the integration of data and interventions across human medicine, veterinary medicine, and environmental surveillance—the One Health approach. Future clinical trials must embed this principle, utilizing surveillance data from agricultural settings or wastewater monitoring to inform trial site selection and predict emerging resistance threats. Integrating comparative effectiveness research across animal and human health is crucial to ensuring any newly approved human antibiotic does not inadvertently accelerate resistance in the agricultural sector.

Leveraging AI and Big Data for Trial Success

Advanced computational methods are poised to optimize virtually every stage of the AMR clinical trial process, from design to execution.

• Optimizing Site Selection and Patient Recruitment:

Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms can analyze large hospital electronic health record (EHR) datasets and real-time surveillance data to accurately predict where and when outbreaks of specific resistant pathogens are likely to occur. This enables sponsors to prioritize and activate trial sites with the highest potential for timely patient enrollment, significantly reducing the "time-to-recruit" challenge.

• Predictive Modeling and Dose Optimization:

Big Data analytics can enhance PK/PD modeling by integrating diverse patient parameters (genetics, comorbidities, real-time physiological data) to predict individual patient responses and refine optimal dosing regimens. Machine learning can rapidly analyze complex microbiology and genomics data generated during trials, accelerating the identification of resistance mechanisms and improving trial endpoint adjudication.

• Accelerating Clinical Data Analysis:

For complex platform trials, AI tools can rapidly process vast, heterogeneous datasets, identifying clinically relevant signals, predicting therapeutic success, and accelerating the time required for regulatory submission. This computational enhancement is essential for extracting maximum scientific value from the limited patient populations available for the testing of new-generation antimicrobials. ^[23-28]

CONCLUSION

The global crisis of Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) poses an existential threat to the foundations of modern medicine, and as this review has demonstrated, clinical trials remain the fundamental gatekeeper for mitigating this challenge. Despite significant preclinical breakthroughs, the successful translation of novel agents into licensed, accessible medicines is profoundly dependent on the quality, efficiency, and adaptability of the clinical development pathway. The current conventional Phase III randomized controlled trial model, designed for broad-spectrum antibiotics and non-inferiority comparisons, is increasingly rendered obsolete by the low incidence of specific resistant infections, the ethical constraints of control arms, and the urgent need for timely treatment. The future of AMR combat necessitates innovative trial methodologies, moving beyond these traditional paradigms to embrace adaptive and streamlined approaches.

The antibiotic development landscape is undergoing a critical transformation marked by a decisive shift from purely bactericidal drugs to a diversified portfolio of non-traditional therapies. This includes the clinical exploration of bacteriophage therapy, which demands bespoke regulatory standards for personalized, multi-component treatments; antivirulence agents and host-targeting therapies, which mandate the adoption of novel, clinically relevant endpoints (e.g., reduction in mortality or organ damage rather than microbiological eradication); and various immunotherapies and Antimicrobial Peptides (AMPs). This therapeutic diversification is scientifically promising, yet each modality introduces unique challenges regarding standardization, manufacturing quality control, and the establishment of robust, consensus-driven clinical trial methodologies.

Ultimately, the failure of the antibiotic pipeline is not fundamentally a scientific problem, but an economic and systemic one. The lack of market viability, characterized by a low return on investment for necessary, restrictively used drugs, continues to erode industry participation in late-stage development. Therefore, the final call to action is directed toward all key stakeholders—governments, the pharmaceutical industry, and the academic community—to urgently implement the required economic and regulatory reforms. These reforms must center on high-value 'Pull' economic incentives, such as market entry rewards and subscription models, to financially de-risk the crucial, high-cost Phase III trials. Concurrently, international efforts, facilitated by groups like the WHO and GARDP, must accelerate the adoption of platform trial designs and bolster global collaboration under the One Health framework to harmonize protocols and leverage global epidemiology. Only through this synchronized application of financial foresight, regulatory flexibility (e.g., LPAD), and innovative clinical science can the world ensure a sustainable pipeline capable of meeting the escalating challenge of AMR and safeguarding future public health.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.

REFERENCES

1. Murray CJ, Ikuta KS, Sharara F, Swetschinski L, Robles Aguilar G, Gray A, et al. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: a systematic analysis. The Lancet. 2022;399(10325).
2. Wagner TM, Howden BP, Sundsfjord A, Hegstad K. Transiently silent acquired antimicrobial resistance: an emerging challenge in susceptibility testing. Vol. 78, Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2023.
3. Shallcross LJ, Howard SJ, Fowler T, Davies SC. Tackling the threat of antimicrobial resistance: From policy to sustainable action. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2015;370(1670).
4. Antimicrobial resistance [Internet]. [cited 2025 Oct 18]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/antimicrobial-resistance
5. Böttcher L, Gersbach H, Wernli D. Restoring the antibiotic R&D market to combat the resistance crisis. Science and Public Policy. 2022;49(1):127–31.
6. Bhaskar P. Antibiotic resistance and a dire need for novel and innovative therapies: The impending crisis. Syncytia. 2023;1(2):27–35.
7. Brüssow H. The antibiotic resistance crisis and the development of new antibiotics. Microbial Biotechnology. 2024;17(7):e14510.
8. Tang KWK, Millar BC, Moore JE. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR). British journal of biomedical science. 2023;80:11387.
9. Baekkeskov E, Rubin O, Munkholm L, Zaman W. Antimicrobial resistance as a global health crisis. In: Oxford research Encyclopedia of politics. 2020.
10. Capozzi C, Maurici M, Panà A. Antimicrobial resistance: it is a global crisis," a slow tsunami". Igiene e sanita pubblica. 2019;75(6):429–50.
11. Fong IW. Antimicrobial resistance: a crisis in the making. New antimicrobials: for the present and the future. 2023;1–21.
12. Walsh TR, Gales AC, Laxminarayan R, Dodd PC. Antimicrobial resistance: addressing a global threat to humanity. Vol. 20, PLoS medicine. Public Library of Science San Francisco, CA USA; 2023. p. e1004264.
13. Livermore DM, Development BS for ACWP on TUNRADD and, Blaser M, Carrs O, Cassell G, Fishman N, et al. Discovery research: the scientific challenge of finding new antibiotics. Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy. 2011;66(9):1941–4.
14. Anderson M, Panteli D, van Kessel R, Ljungqvist G, Colombo F, Mossialos E. Challenges and opportunities for incentivising antibiotic research and development in Europe. The Lancet Regional Health–Europe. 2023;33.
15. Årdal C, Balasegaram M, Laxminarayan R, McAdams D, Outterson K, Rex JH, et al. Antibiotic development—economic, regulatory and societal challenges. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2020;18(5):267–74.
16. Sinha MS, Kesselheim AS. Regulatory incentives for antibiotic drug development: a review of recent proposals. Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry. 2016;24(24):6446–51.
17. Simpkin VL, Renwick MJ, Kelly R, Mossialos E. Incentivising innovation in antibiotic drug discovery and development: progress, challenges and next steps. The Journal of antibiotics. 2017;70(12):1087–96.
18. Theuretzbacher U, Piddock LJ v. Non-traditional antibacterial therapeutic options and challenges. Cell host & microbe. 2019;26(1):61–72.
19. Umarje SC, Banerjee SK. Non-traditional approaches for control of antibiotic resistance. Expert opinion on biological therapy. 2023;23(11):1113–35.
20. Romanos LT, Kontogiannis DS, Tsiampali C, Tzvetanova ID, Falagas ME. Antibiotics and non-traditional antimicrobial agents for Pseudomonas aeruginosa in clinical phases 1, 2, and 3 trials. Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs. 2025;34(7–8):639–53.
21. Konwar AN, Hazarika SN, Bharadwaj P, Thakur D. Emerging non-traditional approaches to combat antibiotic resistance. Current microbiology. 2022;79(11):330.
22. Wani MY, Ahmad A. Non-traditional approaches to combat antimicrobial drug resistance. Springer; 2023.
23. Vaou N, Stavropoulou E, Voidarou C, Tsigalou C, Bezirtzoglou E. Towards advances in medicinal plant antimicrobial activity: A review study on challenges and future perspectives. Microorganisms. 2021;9(10):2041.
24. Thomson CJ, Power E, Ruebsamen-Waigmann H, Labischinski H. Antibacterial research and development in the 21st Century–an industry perspective of the challenges. Current opinion in microbiology. 2004;7(5):445–50.
25. Streicher LM. Exploring the future of infectious disease treatment in a post-antibiotic era: A comparative review of alternative therapeutics. Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance. 2021;24:285–95.
26. Nainu F, Permana AD, Djide NJN, Anjani QK, Utami RN, Rumata NR, et al. Pharmaceutical approaches on antimicrobial resistance: prospects and challenges. Antibiotics. 2021;10(8):981.
27. Puri B, Vaishya R, Vaish A. Antimicrobial resistance: Current challenges and future directions. Medical Journal Armed Forces India. 2025;81(3):247–58.
28. Powers JH. Antimicrobial drug development–the past, the present, and the future. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2004;10:23–31.