Available online on 15.02.2026 at http://jddtonline.info

Journal of Drug Delivery and Therapeutics

Open Access to Pharmaceutical and Medical Research

Copyright   © 2026 The  Author(s): This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC 4.0 which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial use provided the original author and source are credited

Open Access Full Text Article                                                        Review Article

Biofilm-Resistant Infections: Innovative Inhibitors and Treatment Strategies

Suresh Waghamare, ¹*, Jahed Sayyad ¹, Ashwini Jadhav ², Poonam Kodag ³

¹ Department of Pharmaceutics, NIMS Institute of Pharmacy, NIMS University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.

² Rashtriya College of Pharmacy, Hatnoor, Maharashtra, India.

³ Shri A.B. Arts, Commerce, Science Senior College, Deogaon Rangari, Chh. Sambhajinagar, Maharashtra, India.

Graphical Abstract 

 

1. Introduction

Biofilms are organized populations of microorganisms that adhere to surfaces and are encased in an extracellular matrix of polymers produced by the bacteria. These biofilms are commonly formed by bacteria, fungi, and other microorganisms, and they can develop on biotic (living tissues) and abiotic (medical devices, water pipes, industrial equipment) surfaces. Biofilm formation is a natural process that occurs in various environments, including natural ecosystems like rivers, oceans, and soil, as well as in clinical and industrial settings. While biofilms play an essential role in microbial ecology, they also pose significant challenges in medicine, industry, and the environment due to their resilience against antimicrobial treatments and their association with chronic infections. ¹ Biofilm-associated infections are notoriously difficult to treat due to the unique characteristics of biofilms that confer protection to microorganisms. The extracellular matrix of the biofilm acts as a physical barrier, preventing antibiotics and immune cells from effectively reaching the bacteria within. Furthermore, biofilm bacteria can enter a latent phase and often exhibit altered metabolic states, thereby reducing their susceptibility to traditional antimicrobial treatments. ² Persisters, which can survive antibiotic treatment and then proliferate to reinfect, can also be found in biofilms. These characteristics make biofilm-associated infections persistent and frequently recurring by enhancing their persistence. Numerous illnesses, including persistent wounds, urinary tract infections, lung infections (particularly in individuals with cystic fibrosis), and infections associated with medical implants or devices such as catheters and prosthetic joints, are caused by bacteria that form biofilms. ³

2. Types of biofilm inhibitors

Biofilm inhibitors are substances that interfere with the formation, maintenance, or activity of biofilms, structured communities of microorganisms attached to surfaces and encased in an extracellular matrix. Biofilm-related infections are challenging to treat because they confer resistance to antibiotics, immune responses, and environmental stresses. Various types of biofilm inhibitors have been developed or studied for their potential to disrupt biofilm formation, reduce biofilm persistence, or enhance the effectiveness of antimicrobial therapies. ⁴These inhibitors can be broadly categorized into several types, 

2.1. Natural Inhibitors,

2.2. Synthetic Inhibitors,

2.3. Enzymatic Inhibitors,

2.4. Physical Inhibitors.

2.1. Natural inhibitors

Natural plant-derived inhibitors have garnered significant attention in therapeutic research due to their bioactive properties, which can modulate various biological pathways and treat a wide range of diseases. These plant-derived compounds, such as flavonoids, alkaloids, terpenes, glycosides, and saponins, are being extensively studied for their potential to inhibit disease progression, support immune function, and prevent chronic conditions such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. ⁵

Flavonoids are a diverse group of polyphenolic compounds found in fruits, vegetables, and herbs. Known for their antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anticancer properties, flavonoids can modulate key enzymes involved in oxidative stress and inflammation, which are linked to the development of many diseases. Studies have shown that flavonoids, such as quercetin, kaempferol, and catechins, can inhibit cancer cell growth, suppress inflammatory cytokine production, and improve cardiovascular health by enhancing endothelial function and reducing blood pressure. ⁶

Alkaloids are nitrogen-containing compounds commonly found in plants like poppies, coffee, and tobacco. These compounds have been used for centuries in traditional medicine due to their potent pharmacological effects. For instance, alkaloids like morphine, nicotine, and caffeine exhibit a range of therapeutic properties, from pain relief and neuroprotection to stimulation and mood enhancement. More recently, alkaloids such as berberine have gained attention for their ability to regulate blood glucose levels and improve insulin sensitivity, making them promising candidates for managing type 2 diabetes. ⁷

Terpenes are another class of plant-derived compounds that have shown great promise in therapeutic applications. Found in essential oils from herbs, citrus fruits, and conifers, terpenes like limonene, pinene, and linalool are known for their antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, and anticancer effects. For example, limonene, found in citrus peels, has demonstrated the ability to inhibit the growth of cancer cells and reduce tumor size in preclinical studies. Terpenes are also being explored for their neuroprotective properties, as some studies suggest they can enhance brain function and protect against neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s. ⁸ Glycosides are compounds consisting of a sugar molecule attached to a non-sugar molecule, often found in medicinal plants like ginseng, senna, and digitalis. These compounds are known to exhibit a wide range of biological activities, including anticancer, antimicrobial, and anti-inflammatory effects. For instance, the glycosides found in digitalis purpurea (foxglove) are crucial in the treatment of heart failure as they increase the strength and efficiency of heart contractions. Similarly, glycosides derived from plants such as stevia have been studied for their potential to lower blood sugar levels and manage diabetes. ⁹

Saponins are glycosides with soap-like properties found in a variety of plants, including soybeans, ginseng, and quinoa. These compounds are renowned for their ability to modulate the immune system, lower blood cholesterol, and exhibit anti-inflammatory and anticancer effects. Saponins have been shown to influence the activity of enzymes involved in cholesterol metabolism, making them potential agents for managing hyperlipidemia. Additionally, some saponins have demonstrated anticancer properties by promoting tumor cell death and inhibiting tumor growth. ¹⁰

2.2. Synthetic inhibitors

Synthetic inhibitors, including small molecules and peptides, have emerged as essential tools in modern drug development. These compounds are specifically designed to target and modulate biological pathways involved in disease processes. Their therapeutic applications span a wide range of conditions, including cancer, autoimmune disorders, infectious diseases, and metabolic disorders. The two primary classes of synthetic inhibitors, small molecules and peptides, each have unique mechanisms of action and advantages in drug design. ¹¹ Small molecules are typically low-molecular-weight compounds that can easily enter cells and interact with specific proteins, enzymes, or receptors to inhibit their activity. They are often designed to target key enzymes or signaling pathways that are overactive in diseases such as cancer, viral infections, and inflammation. One of the most significant applications of small molecules is in cancer therapy, where these inhibitors target specific proteins involved in tumor growth and survival.

 For instance, tyrosine kinase inhibitors like Imatinib have revolutionized the treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia by inhibiting the BCR-ABL fusion protein, a hallmark of the disease. Other small molecules, like proteasome inhibitors, target cellular machinery involved in protein degradation, which is critical for controlling cancer cell proliferation and survival. ¹² In the area of infectious diseases, small molecules are also widely used to inhibit viral replication or bacterial growth. Antiviral drugs like protease inhibitors and integrase inhibitors are essential in the treatment of HIV/AIDS, while antibacterial agents like quinolones target bacterial DNA replication. Small molecules are also being developed to target the influenza virus and other emerging viral infections, offering new avenues for treatment. ¹³

Peptides are short chains of amino acids that can also act as inhibitors by specifically binding to their target proteins, often with high selectivity and potency. Because of their ability to mimic or interfere with protein-protein interactions, peptides are increasingly being explored as therapeutic agents. ¹⁴ In cancer therapy, peptides can be designed to block the interaction between oncogenic proteins and their targets. For example, checkpoint inhibitors, such as immune checkpoint blockade peptides, aim to disrupt the interaction between immune checkpoint proteins and cancer cells, allowing the immune system to better recognize and destroy tumor cells. Another approach involves using anti-angiogenic peptides to inhibit the formation of new blood vessels (angiogenesis) that tumors rely on for growth and metastasis. ¹⁵ Immunomodulatory peptides are being designed to specifically target and regulate immune system activity, thereby reducing the overactive immune responses seen in diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis. Some peptides have the potential to modulate T-cell activity, thereby preventing autoimmune attacks on healthy tissues.¹⁶

In infectious diseases, peptides offer a promising alternative to traditional antibiotics. Antimicrobial peptides are naturally occurring in the body and have been synthesized for therapeutic use due to their ability to kill or inhibit the growth of bacteria, fungi, and viruses. These peptides disrupt microbial cell membranes, making them less likely to induce resistance than conventional antibiotics. Synthetic antimicrobial peptides are being studied for their effectiveness against multidrug-resistant pathogens and could offer new treatments for difficult-to-treat infections. ¹⁷ 

 2.3. Enzymatic inhibitors

By targeting and breaking down components of the EPS, enzymatic inhibitors can potentially weaken biofilms, enhance the effectiveness of antimicrobial agents, and improve the treatment of chronic infections ¹⁸. One of the most studied enzymatic inhibitors for biofilm disruption involves the use of DNAse (deoxyribonuclease), an enzyme that degrades extracellular DNA present in biofilms. Edna plays a crucial structural role in the EPS matrix, contributing to biofilm stability, cell-to-cell communication, and the protection of embedded microorganisms. In many biofilm-associated infections, such as those caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, and Escherichia coli, a key component of the biofilm matrix is a key component of the biofilm matrix that shields bacterial cells from antibiotics and immune system attacks. ¹⁹ This reduction in biofilm formation can make bacteria more susceptible to traditional antibiotics and allow the host's immune system to clear the infection better. Clinical research has demonstrated that DNase, when used in combination with other antimicrobial treatments, can enhance the efficacy of antibiotic therapies, particularly in chronic infections such as cystic fibrosis, where P. aeruginosa biofilms are a significant problem. ²⁰ Proteins, including adhesions, enzymes, and other structural proteins, are essential components of the EPS matrix, contributing to biofilm formation, maintenance, and resistance to antimicrobial agents. By breaking down these proteins, proteases can weaken the structural integrity of biofilms, making it easier for antibiotics and host defenses to eliminate bacterial colonies. ²¹ Proteases such as proteinase K, subtilisin, and trypsin have been shown to degrade the proteinaceous components of biofilms, including PSL and PEL, exopolysaccharides produced by bacteria such as P. aeruginosa. These proteases not only degrade structural proteins but also interfere with quorum sensing, the process by which bacteria communicate to coordinate biofilm formation and virulence. ²² By disrupting these signals, proteases can inhibit biofilm formation and virulence factor production, rendering bacterial cells more vulnerable to immune responses and treatment with antimicrobial agents. ²³

Combining enzymatic inhibitors with antibiotics represents one of the most promising therapeutic strategies for managing biofilm-related infections. This synergistic approach is particularly valuable in chronic diseases, where the biofilm matrix serves as a physical and chemical barrier, limiting antibiotic penetration and efficacy ²⁴. For instance, the co-administration of DNase with antibiotics such as beta-lactams, aminoglycosides, or fluoroquinolones has been shown to increase bacterial susceptibility within biofilms significantly. Similarly, proteases can degrade structural proteins in the biofilm matrix, improving antibiotic access and action. ²⁵This dual approach not only enhances treatment efficacy but also reduces the likelihood of resistance development—an issue often exacerbated by the protective nature of biofilms, as illustrated in Figure 1, which highlights the mechanisms of enzymatic biofilm inhibitors. ²⁶

 

 

Figure 1: Enzymatic biofilm inhibitors

 

 

2.4 Physical biofilm inhibitors

Physical biofilm inhibitors are approaches that utilize physical forces or conditions to prevent biofilm formation or disrupt established biofilms. One of the most promising techniques is ultrasound therapy, which uses high-frequency sound waves to create mechanical vibrations that can break apart biofilm structures. Ultrasound cavitation produces microbubbles in the surrounding fluid, which collapse with force, disrupting the biofilm matrix and enhancing the penetration of antibiotics or other therapeutic agents.^27,28This method is effective in treating biofilm-related infections on tissues, wounds, and medical devices, as it can physically loosen biofilm components and enhance the efficacy of antimicrobial treatments.

Another physical method involves the use of electric fields, such as electrokinetic therapy, which can alter bacterial motility, prevent the initial attachment of bacteria to surfaces, or disrupt biofilm structures once they have formed. Applying low-intensity electric fields induces movement in charged particles, including bacterial cells, thereby hindering their adherence to surfaces and subsequent biofilm formation. ²⁹ This technique has been investigated for applications in cleaning biofilms from medical devices such as catheters and implants. Additionally, photodynamic therapy, another emerging physical approach, uses light-activated compounds, known as photosensitizers, to generate reactive oxygen species (ROS). When exposed to light, these ROS can damage the biofilm matrix and microbial cells, making photodynamic therapy a promising tool for treating surface-level and wound-related biofilm infections (Fig. 2: Physical biofilm inhibitor) ³⁰

Figure 2: Physical biofilm inhibitor

3. Mechanisms of Action for Biofilm Inhibitors

Quorum sensing (QS) is a cell-to-cell communication system that bacteria use to coordinate behavior based on population density. This system regulates various processes, including biofilm formation, virulence factor production, and antibiotic resistance. Quorum-sensing inhibitors (QSIs) target the signaling molecules known as autoinducers that mediate this communication. By disrupting QS, these inhibitors prevent bacteria from initiating biofilm formation, thus reducing the bacterial population’s ability to form protective biofilms. QSIs can interfere with the synthesis or reception of autoinducers, effectively "silencing" the biofilm-forming process (X. Zhao et al., 2020). Inhibition of QS also reduces the production of virulence factors, making bacteria less pathogenic and more susceptible to immune responses or antibiotic treatments. This mechanism is particularly valuable in infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus, where QS plays a critical role in biofilm establishment and persistence. ³¹

3.1. Matrix Degradation

The extracellular matrix (ECM) of a biofilm is a dense network of polymers, including polysaccharides, proteins, and extracellular DNA, which provide structural support and protection to the bacteria within. Matrix-degrading enzymes, such as DNases, proteases, and polysaccharide-degrading enzymes, target and break down these components, disrupting the integrity of the biofilm. By degrading the matrix, these enzymes expose the bacteria to antibiotics, immune cells, and environmental stresses, thus weakening the biofilm’s protective barrier. ³² For instance, enzymes like Dispersin B specifically break down polysaccharides, while DNase I cleaves extracellular DNA, which is crucial for biofilm stability. Matrix degradation not only facilitates the removal of biofilms but also enhances the effectiveness of conventional antibiotics, which may otherwise fail to penetrate the dense biofilm structure. This mechanism is especially useful in treating chronic wounds, diabetic foot ulcers, and infections involving indwelling medical devices. ¹⁸

3.2 Surface Adherence Inhibition

The first step in biofilm formation is the adherence of bacteria to a surface, whether it’s a biological tissue, medical device, or environmental surface. Biofilm inhibitors that target surface adherence prevent bacteria from attaching to surfaces in the first place. These inhibitors can include molecules that block adhesin proteins (e.g., pili, fimbriae) on the bacterial surface, which are responsible for the initial attachment to surfaces. Additionally, specific biofilm inhibitors interfere with the bacterial cell’s ability to recognize and bind to specific receptors on the surface. Some of these inhibitors mimic the natural ligands or substrates that bacteria use for attachment, thereby blocking the adhesins from binding to the surface. By preventing the initial adherence of bacteria, these inhibitors can effectively avoid the entire biofilm formation process, reducing the likelihood of chronic infections associated with medical devices and implants. Surface-adherence inhibition is particularly useful for preventing implant-associated infections and biofilm formation on catheters, prosthetics, and other implanted devices. ¹

Biofilm inhibitors operate through various mechanisms, including disrupting quorum sensing to prevent coordinated biofilm formation, degrading the extracellular matrix to weaken the biofilm structure, and inhibiting bacterial adherence to surfaces to block the initial stages of biofilm development. These strategies not only offer innovative approaches to managing persistent infections but also enhance the efficacy of conventional antibiotic treatments, providing a promising avenue for combating chronic and multidrug-resistant infections (Figure 3: Surface Adherence Inhibition). A comparative overview of these mechanisms across different pathogen groups is summarized in Table No. 01: Comparison of Mechanisms of Action across Different Pathogen Groups.

Figure 3: Surface Adherence Inhibition

 

 

Table 1: Comparison of Mechanisms of Action across Different Pathogen Groups

Mechanism	Bacteria	Viruses	Fungi	Parasites	Broad-Spectrum Efficacy	Ref
Disruption of the Cell Membrane	Targets the phospholipid bilayer or peptidoglycan integrity (e.g., polymyxins).	Enveloped viruses are affected by lipid bilayer disruption.	Targets ergosterol in fungal cell membranes (e.g., amphotericin B).	Disrupts the outer membranes of parasites (e.g., antimalarials).	Effective across lipid-containing pathogens.	33
Inhibition of Protein Synthesis	Blocks ribosomes (e.g., tetracyclines, aminoglycosides	Limited due to reliance on host machinery, but some viral proteins can be inhibited.	Minimal effect: Fungal ribosomes differ significantly from bacteria	Effective against unique parasite ribosomes (e.g., doxycycline).	Limited broad-spectrum applicability	34
Nucleic Acid Synthesis Inhibition	Targets DNA gyrase or RNA polymerase (e.g., fluoroquinolones, rifampin).	Targets viral polymerases or reverse transcriptases (e.g., remdesivir).	Inhibits fungal DNA synthesis (e.g., flucytosine).	Inhibits DNA replication (e.g., antimalarial quinolines).	Broad-spectrum with specific enzyme targeting.	35
Immune Modulation	Stimulates innate immunity or adaptive response (e.g., vaccines, cytokine therapy).	Enhances antiviral defenses, such as interferons.	Promotes antifungal immune responses	Enhances parasite-specific immune activity.	Broad-spectrum via host immune activation.	36
Targeting Biofilms	Disrupts bacterial biofilms with specific agents (e.g., DNase enzymes).	Prevents biofilm formation on host tissues or medical devices	Limited; biofilms are less common in fungi.	Targets biofilm-like structures in parasites	Moderate efficacy, pathogen-dependent	37
Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS)	Generates ROS to damage bacterial cells (e.g., metronidazole)	Induces oxidative stress, impairing viral function.	Fungi damaged by oxidative stress (e.g., ROS-inducing antifungals)	Parasites susceptible to oxidative damage (e.g., artemisinins).	Effective against oxidative stress-sensitive pathogens.	(González-Jiménez

 

 

4. Enhancing antibiotics by expanding the target

Biofilms are not only formed by well-known bacterial pathogens such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus, but are also implicated in infections caused by various other microorganisms, including fungi and emerging multidrug-resistant bacteria. Candida albicans, a common fungal pathogen, is known to form biofilms on medical devices such as catheters, leading to persistent infections, especially in immunocompromised individuals. These fungal biofilms are resistant to conventional antifungal therapies, posing significant challenges in clinical management. In addition, pathogens such as Acinetobacter baumannii and Klebsiella pneumoniae, both of which are increasingly resistant to multiple classes of antibiotics, can form robust biofilms that protect them from host immune responses and treatment interventions. Acinetobacter baumannii, in particular, is notorious for its ability to survive on surfaces and medical devices, contributing to hospital-acquired infections. These pathogens’ ability to form biofilms complicates treatment options, making them crucial targets for biofilm-disrupting therapies. Expanding the scope to include these pathogens underscores the critical need for broader-spectrum biofilm inhibitors that can target a wider array of infectious agents beyond the most-studied organisms. ³⁸

Biofilm-related infections pose a significant clinical burden, as biofilms protect pathogens from both the immune system and the action of antimicrobial agents. This protection leads to chronic, recurrent infections that are difficult to treat with standard antibiotics. For instance, biofilm infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis patients or by Staphylococcus aureus in implant-associated infections are notoriously difficult to eradicate. These infections can lead to long-term health problems, including organ damage, persistent inflammation, and even sepsis. In clinical settings, biofilm-forming pathogens can result in prolonged hospital stays, increased medical costs, and higher mortality rates. ³⁹ Targeting biofilm synthesis with specific inhibitors could significantly improve patient outcomes by making biofilms more susceptible to conventional therapies. A growing body of evidence suggests that biofilm-targeting strategies could reduce the frequency of chronic infections, minimize the need for surgical interventions, and ultimately decrease healthcare costs. Highlighting the clinical significance of biofilm inhibitors emphasizes their potential to improve the management of these challenging infections. ⁴⁰

Biofilm formation is a complex process involving microbial adhesion, matrix production, and community interactions. Biofilm inhibitors can work through various mechanisms to interfere with this process. For instance, specific inhibitors target quorum sensing, a bacterial communication mechanism that regulates biofilm formation. Disrupting quorum sensing can prevent the initial adhesion of microbes to surfaces and hinder the maturation of biofilms. Additionally, some biofilm inhibitors aim to degrade the extracellular matrix, which is primarily composed of polysaccharides, proteins, and nucleic acids. By breaking down the matrix, these inhibitors make biofilms more porous and susceptible to antimicrobial agents. Other strategies focus on preventing the adherence of microbes to surfaces or promoting the dispersion of biofilm cells, which can reduce the stability of the biofilm community. Understanding these mechanisms across various pathogen groups is crucial for developing targeted therapies. ⁴¹ For example, while quorum-sensing inhibitors may be particularly effective against certain Gram-negative bacteria, such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, matrix-degrading enzymes may be more effective against biofilms formed by Staphylococcus aureus or Candida albicans. This mechanistic diversity supports the need for broad-spectrum biofilm inhibitors. ⁴²

One of the most promising aspects of biofilm inhibitors is their potential to enhance the efficacy of existing antibiotics. Biofilm structure creates a physical barrier that prevents antibiotics from reaching the deeper layers of microbial communities, which is why infections associated with biofilms are often resistant to treatment. By disrupting the biofilm matrix or inhibiting biofilm formation, these inhibitors can increase the penetration of antibiotics into biofilm-covered pathogens, restoring the effectiveness of drugs that might otherwise be ineffective. Moreover, biofilm inhibitors can reverse the tolerance of biofilm-forming bacteria to antibiotics, enabling the use of lower antibiotic doses. Studies have shown that combination therapies, pairing biofilm inhibitors with conventional antibiotics, can yield synergistic effects that reduce the required antibiotic dosage and minimize the development of resistance. For instance, when used in combination with beta-lactams, biofilm-disrupting agents can help treat Klebsiella pneumoniae infections more effectively. This combination approach holds great promise for overcoming antibiotic resistance and enhancing the treatment of complex infections.⁴³

In recent years, novel therapeutic strategies have emerged to target biofilm synthesis and disruption. Nanoparticles, for example, have been shown to exhibit unique properties that enable them to penetrate biofilms and interact with microbial cells, potentially disrupting biofilm formation and enhancing antibiotic efficacy. Additionally, bacteriophage therapy, which involves using viruses that specifically target bacteria, has gained interest as a potential treatment for biofilm-related infections. Phages can infect and lyse bacteria within biofilms, offering a highly targeted approach to biofilm disruption. Another exciting area of research is the use of CRISPR-Cas systems to disrupt biofilm-related genes in bacteria. These systems can be programmed to specifically target and edit genes involved in biofilm formation, providing a precise and potent tool for combating biofilm-associated infections. ⁴⁴ Clinical studies exploring the effectiveness of these emerging therapeutics are still in their early stages, but they represent promising alternatives or adjuncts to conventional treatments. By addressing these novel strategies, you can highlight cutting-edge approaches that could one day become part of the standard arsenal against biofilm-related infections.⁴⁵

5. Implications for Chronic Conditions.

5.1. Cystic Fibrosis

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a chronic genetic disorder that primarily affects the respiratory system, where thick mucus buildup creates an ideal environment for biofilm formation. One of the most prominent pathogens in CF patients is Pseudomonas aeruginosa. This biofilm-forming bacterium colonizes the lungs and contributes to chronic infections, persistent inflammation, and progressive lung damage. These biofilms are particularly resistant to antibiotics, making eradication nearly impossible and leading to frequent exacerbations and a decline in lung function. Biofilm inhibitors could play a critical role in managing CF by disrupting the biofilm matrix, improving antibiotic penetration, and reducing bacterial load. For example, quorum-sensing inhibitors have shown promise in preclinical studies by impairing the communication pathways essential for biofilm formation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. By targeting biofilm synthesis, these inhibitors could potentially improve the quality of life for CF patients and delay disease progression. ⁴⁶

5.2. Diabetic Foot Ulcers

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs caused by diabetes are pervasive, and they usually lead to slow-healing wounds suffered as a result of the formation of poly-microbial biofilms. Pathogens such as Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Candida albicans are strong biofilm formers in these ulcers, creating a protective barrier that hinders immune clearance and antibiotic efficacy. These biofilms lead to increased inflammation, delayed wound healing, and increased risk of severe complications such as amputations. Novel biofilm inhibitors could revolutionize the treatment of DFUs by destroying the exopolymeric matrix, facilitating the effectiveness of topical antibiotics, and enhancing wound healing. Biofilm-targeted therapy might also lessen the need for surgical intervention, therefore improving patient outcomes. Lowering the biofilm component of DFUs would likely reduce the true prevalence of chronic infections and relieve the burden on healthcare systems. ⁴⁷

5.3. Implant-Associated Infections

Implants in the medical field, such as orthopedic prostheses, cardiac pacemakers, and catheters, tend to have a high likelihood of being infected owing to biofilms. Such infections are commonly caused by pathogens like Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus aureus, which attach themselves to the surface of the implants, thus forming a biofilm that protects them from immune responses and antibiotics. Biofilm-associated infections leave doctors with no option but to remove the implants, which causes the person to undergo additional surgeries, Increases hospital days, and therefore increases healthcare costs. The creation of dry surface biofilms creates a great deal of challenge, as many antimicrobial treatments do not work on them. Biofilm inhibitors may prove to be the ideal solution to these problems, as such agents could reduce implant-associated infections by preventing biofilm formation or removing existing biofilms, thus making the pathogens vulnerable to antibiotics. If these agents are added to the surface coatings of the implants, their risk can be reduced. Transforming such strategies into practice in the medical field can help improve the life of the implants and decrease the associated issues of the negative impacts of biofilms. It is crucial to address the changes that such inhibitors can bring to the management of extreme infections; there is a great deal of promise in the biofilm orchestrating enzymes. ^48,49

5.3. Clinical Significance

One of the significant challenges in the treatment of biofilm-related infections is that antibiotics are generally ineffective against biofilm-encased pathogens. Biofilms serve as a physical barrier that hinders the deep penetration of antimicrobial agents within the microbial community, and bacteria within the biofilm often possess altered metabolic states that make them less responsive to antibiotics. Furthermore, biofilm-associated bacteria can exchange resistance genes, which further complicates treatment. Biofilm inhibitors could help in this manner by disrupting the biofilm matrix, thereby allowing antibiotics to access it more easily and targeting mechanisms that contribute to bacterial tolerance within biofilms. This, in turn, may dramatically decrease the failure rates encountered with conventional antibiotics, especially in chronic infections when standard treatments fail most of the time. Biofilm inhibitors may slow the rate of antibiotic resistance development by making existing antibiotics more effective. They will thus enable the better management of resistant infections and preserve the utility of currently available antimicrobial agents. 

Biofilm-associated infections are notoriously difficult to treat, leading to prolonged illness, frequent hospitalizations, and in some cases, even death, especially in immunocompromised or critically ill patients. In conditions such as cystic fibrosis, diabetic foot ulcers, and implant-associated infections, biofilm formation on infected tissue or devices creates a persistent reservoir of pathogens that resists both the immune system and drug therapies. Biofilm inhibitors could significantly improve patient outcomes by targeting biofilm formation or disrupting established biofilms. Biofilm inhibitors not only make pathogens more susceptible to antibiotics but also reduce the risk of antibiotic resistance. Still, they may also reduce the chronicity of infections, leading to quicker resolution of symptoms, fewer complications, and reduced need for surgical interventions. For patients with chronic conditions, this could translate into better long-term quality of life, fewer hospital readmissions, and more cost-effective care. By targeting biofilms specifically, these therapies have the potential to transform the management of infections historically difficult to treat, improving both prognosis and overall well-being of patients. ⁴⁷

6. Studies On Biofilm-Targeting Therapies Reducing Morbidity and Mortality

Several studies have demonstrated that biofilm-targeting therapies can lead to significant reductions in morbidity and mortality, especially in chronic infections where conventional treatments fail. These therapies generally aim to either prevent biofilm formation, disrupt mature biofilms, or enhance the effectiveness of antibiotics against biofilm-protected pathogens. Below are examples of studies showing the positive clinical impact of biofilm inhibitors.

A study published in Wound Repair and Regeneration explored the use of biofilm-degrading enzymes, such as DNase I and dispersin B, in the treatment of chronic wound infections, particularly diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). These enzymes degrade the biofilm's extracellular matrix, thereby exposing the bacteria to antibiotics and immune defenses. The results showed that patients treated with biofilm-degrading enzymes had a significant reduction in bacterial load and faster wound healing compared to those receiving standard antibiotic treatments. This study highlighted how disrupting biofilms in DFUs can reduce infection-related morbidity and accelerate recovery, ultimately improving patient quality of life and reducing the need for amputation. ⁵⁰

A study conducted by researchers at the University of California tested the efficacy of quorum-sensing inhibitors (QSIs) in treating chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in cystic fibrosis patients. P. aeruginosa is notorious for forming biofilms in the lungs of CF patients, leading to chronic infection, inflammation, and lung damage. The study found that QSIs, which interfere with bacterial communication required for biofilm formation, reduced bacterial load in the lungs and decreased the frequency of exacerbations. Notably, the study showed that patients receiving QSI-based treatments had fewer hospitalizations and improved pulmonary function, thus reducing morbidity and enhancing long-term patient outcomes. These findings underline the potential for QSIs to reduce the chronicity and severity of infections in CF patients by targeting biofilm formation. ⁵¹ A study published in The Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy examined the use of biofilm-resistant coatings on medical devices, including catheters and prosthetic joints. ⁵² These coatings, which harbor antimicrobial agents or biofilm inhibitors, such as silver nanoparticles, were used in patients undergoing implant surgeries. The study demonstrated a significant decrease in the incidence of implant-related infections and biofilm formation on implanted devices. Postoperative infections were reduced, as were the rate of device-related complications and the rate of revision surgery, and hence patient outcomes improved in terms of lower mortality and reduced morbidity from implant-associated infections, emphasizing the clinical utility of biofilm-resistant strategies for preventing the severe complications of implant infections. ⁵³

A randomized controlled trial in Lancet Infectious Diseases recently tested the effectiveness of combining antibiotics with biofilm-targeting agents for treating biofilm infections caused by the multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae strain in critically ill patients. ⁵⁴ It demonstrated that the addition of biofilm-disrupting agents, such as N-acetylcysteine, a chemical that disrupts biofilm matrix components, significantly decreased the bacterial load compared with antibiotics alone. Moreover, combination therapy recipients showed a substantially lower risk of septic shock, organ failure, and mortality. The study concluded that biofilm inhibitors not only enhanced the effectiveness of antibiotics but also reduced the morbidity and mortality associated with infections caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens. ⁵⁵

Another study researched the application of bacteriophages in the treatment of patients with chronic osteomyelitis, a type of bone infection caused by bacteria that form biofilms. Bacteriophage therapy has been shown to target and lyse bacterial cells within biofilms without harming human tissues. The study demonstrated that the patients treated with phage therapy showed significant decreases in infection markers, such as C-reactive protein levels, and clinical improvement. The use of phage therapy also reduced the frequency and duration of antibiotic treatments, thereby reducing the risk of antibiotic resistance. Biofilm-targeting phage therapy would thus be beneficial in reducing morbidity associated with chronic osteomyelitis, thereby improving the long-term management of bone infections. ⁵⁶

6.1. Preventing Recurrent or Chronic Infections

Biofilm-targeting therapies play a crucial role in preventing recurrent or chronic infections, which are often challenging to treat because of biofilms' protective nature. In chronic conditions such as cystic fibrosis, diabetic foot ulcers, and implant-related infections, biofilm-forming pathogens can persist in the body, evade immune surveillance, and resist antibiotic treatment. Biofilms act as reservoirs for bacteria, making it easy for infections to recur after an initial treatment course, even when the infection appears to be cleared. Biofilm inhibitors aim to disrupt or prevent the formation of biofilms, thereby reducing the chances of reinfection or chronic colonization. ⁵⁷

For example, in chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa lung infections in cystic fibrosis patients, biofilm-targeting therapies can prevent the establishment of biofilms in the lungs, thus reducing the frequency of exacerbations and preventing long-term lung damage. Similarly, in patients with diabetic foot ulcers, where biofilms frequently prolong infections, biofilm-degrading enzymes and antimicrobial agents can disrupt biofilms, promoting faster wound healing and reducing the likelihood of recurrent infections. In implant-related infections, biofilm-resistant coatings or localized delivery of biofilm inhibitors can prevent pathogens from adhering to medical devices, minimizing the risk of chronic infections associated with implants and reducing the need for repeat surgeries. By breaking the biofilm cycle, these therapies can significantly reduce the risk of recurrent infections, enabling more effective long-term management of chronic conditions. ⁵⁸

6.2. Potential to Decrease Healthcare Costs

Biofilm-related infections often incur high care costs due to the need for long-term treatment, repeated hospital stays, and occasionally costly surgeries. Chronic biofilm infections tend to be harder to treat and usually require extended antibiotic courses, multiple treatment rounds, and often revision surgeries or device replacements. Patients with conditions like diabetic foot ulcers and implant-related infections frequently experience numerous hospital admissions for wound care, infection management, and complications such as amputations. The rise of multidrug-resistant pathogens, many of which are biofilm-associated, further strains costs because available treatments are less effective. (Shineh et al., 2023) Biofilm-targeting therapies could greatly lower these expenses by preventing biofilm formation or dispersing existing biofilms. Such therapies can decrease hospital stays and outpatient visits, reducing overall healthcare costs. For example, biofilm-degrading enzymes and quorum-sensing inhibitors can lessen the need for prolonged antibiotic use, common in biofilm-related infections. Using biofilm-resistant coatings on medical devices may also decrease implant-related infections, lessen the need for device replacements, and cut associated costs. (Sharma et al., 2023) Broadly, as biofilm inhibitors improve patient outcomes and lessen chronic infection impacts, they lead to fewer complications and hospital readmissions, lowering overall healthcare expenses. A study in The Lancet Infectious Diseases showed that biofilm-targeting strategies for managing multidrug-resistant infections cut treatment costs and enhanced patient outcomes, highlighting their potential as a cost-effective approach. The economic benefits of biofilm-targeting treatments are vital not only for patients but also for healthcare systems battling rising costs from antibiotic resistance and managing chronic infections. These therapies could significantly reduce healthcare expenses while enhancing patient care and quality of life by preventing recurrent infections and minimizing the need for costly treatments and hospital stays.

7. Case studies and clinical trials

Biofilm inhibition has become a vital strategy in healthcare to prevent the growth of harmful microbial communities on medical devices, implants, and human tissues. A well-known example of successful biofilm inhibition is using antibiotic-impregnated coatings on medical devices, such as catheters and prosthetic implants. These coatings release antibiotics in a controlled way, stopping bacterial colonization and biofilm formation. Typical applications include silver- or iodine-based coatings, which have proven effective in preventing infections linked to urinary catheters and orthopedic implants. Silver, for instance, has antimicrobial properties that kill bacteria and also prevent their ability to create biofilms, thus lowering the risk of device-related infections (P. Li et al., 2023). Another successful example is the development of biofilm-disrupting enzymes used in wound care. Chronic wounds, especially diabetic ulcers, are prone to biofilm formation by pathogens like Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. Using enzyme-based treatments, such as DNase or proteolytic enzymes, helps break down the extracellular matrix of the biofilm, making bacteria more vulnerable to antibiotics and the immune system. Research shows that these enzyme therapies greatly improve wound healing and decrease infection rates, offering a promising way to fight chronic biofilm infections (Diban et al., 2023). Ongoing research in therapy covers many fields, aiming to enhance and transform treatment options for various diseases. A key focus is gene therapy, where scientists are working on methods to treat genetic disorders by fixing faulty genes. This approach shows promise for conditions like cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, and certain inheritable blindness. Researchers are exploring viral vectors, CRISPR-based genome editing, and therapies that deliver genetic material to repair or replace damaged genes. Although challenges remain in delivery, safety, and long-term effects, gene therapy has great potential to provide cures rather than just managing symptoms (Parambi et al., 2022).

Another area of therapeutic innovation is immunotherapy, particularly in the field of cancer treatment. Immunotherapy aims to harness the body’s immune system to identify and destroy cancer cells more effectively. Researchers are exploring various forms of immunotherapy, including checkpoint inhibitors, CAR T-cell therapy, and cancer vaccines. These therapies have already shown success in treating cancers that were once considered difficult or impossible to treat, such as melanoma and certain types of lung cancer. However, there are ongoing challenges in optimizing these treatments for different cancer types, managing side effects, and ensuring long-term efficacy ⁵⁹

In the field of neurodegenerative diseases, there is significant progress in the development of therapies for Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and other conditions. Researchers are focusing on targeting the underlying causes of these diseases, such as protein aggregation, neuroinflammation, and cellular damage. Novel approaches like gene editing, stem cell therapies, and neuroprotective drugs are under investigation to slow or even reverse disease progression. Some clinical trials have shown encouraging results, but challenges remain in developing treatments that can halt or cure these complex, multifactorial diseases. ⁶⁰

8. Future perspectives                                         

Emerging trends in biofilm research are expanding understanding of biofilm formation, behavior, and potential therapeutic interventions, reflecting their significant role across health and industrial contexts. Biofilms, which are communities of microorganisms that adhere to surfaces and are encased in a self-produced extracellular matrix, are increasingly recognized for their resistance to antibiotics and their role in chronic infections. One of the most exciting trends in biofilm research is the exploration of novel therapeutic strategies to prevent or disrupt biofilm formation. Researchers are investigating substances, such as enzymes, natural compounds, and synthetic molecules, that can target and degrade the extracellular matrix, thereby making the biofilm more susceptible to treatment. This approach holds promise for tackling infections that are otherwise difficult to treat, such as those associated with medical devices, cystic fibrosis, and chronic wounds. ¹

Another emerging trend in biofilm research involves studying biofilm-associated antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Biofilms are known to boost bacterial resistance to antibiotics, which is an increasing concern in healthcare. Researchers are focusing more on understanding the molecular mechanisms behind biofilm-related AMR, such as nutrient shortages, changes in gene expression, and the physical shield created by the biofilm matrix. They are examining how bacteria that form biofilms modify their metabolic and genetic pathways to survive antibiotic treatments. The development of new antimicrobial agents, like antimicrobial peptides, metal nanoparticles, and bacteriophage therapy, is also a major area of interest, as these could offer more effective options against biofilm-related infections, especially with rising antibiotic resistance. (Pandey et al., 2022)

Another trend is the study of biofilm behavior in natural environments and industrial settings. Biofilms are not only a problem in medical fields but also cause issues in industries such as water treatment, food processing, and oil recovery. In water systems, biofilms can clog pipes, damage equipment, and spread harmful pathogens. Research is ongoing to understand the environmental factors that affect biofilm formation in these settings, including temperature, nutrient levels, and surface properties. This research aims to create better materials and systems to prevent or control biofilm growth in industrial use. Also, biofilm-related fouling and microbial contamination in the food industry and pharmaceutical production are being thoroughly examined, with the goal of developing more effective cleaning and decontamination methods.

In environmental microbiology, biofilms are gaining attention for their role in bioremediation. Researchers are exploring how biofilms can be harnessed to clean up pollutants, such as heavy metals and organic contaminants, in water and soil. Biofilms can accumulate and degrade pollutants more efficiently than free-floating microorganisms, offering a more efficient solution for environmental cleanup. Ongoing studies aim to optimize biofilm growth conditions and enhance their pollutant-degrading capabilities, as well as to develop bioreactors that could facilitate large-scale ecological bioremediation. ⁶¹

9. Summary 

Biofilms are complex communities of microbes that form on surfaces, surrounded by a protective polymer matrix that shields them from antibiotics and immune defenses. Their development occurs in three stages: adhesion and dispersion. Factors influencing biofilm formation include quorum sensing, extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) production, and environmental conditions like nutrient availability and temperature. Understanding these elements is essential for developing strategies to prevent or disrupt biofilm growth, improving treatments for chronic infections. Biofilm inhibitors are compounds that interfere with the formation, stability, or activity of biofilms. They are classified as natural, synthetic, enzymatic, physical, or host-targeted. Natural inhibitors often consist of plant-based compounds with antimicrobial effects. Synthetic inhibitors are designed to target specific biological pathways, while enzymatic inhibitors such as DNases and proteases can break down biofilms to enhance antibiotic effectiveness.

Physical inhibitors utilize methods such as ultrasound to break down biofilms. Host-targeted inhibitors enhance immune responses or employ enzymes like lysozyme to help eliminate biofilm-related infections. Advanced drug delivery systems, including nanoparticles, liposomes, micelles, and hydrogels,, are essential for overcoming biofilm-associated infections. These carriers deliver inhibitors directly to biofilm sites, increasing treatment efficacy and reducing side effects. Innovative therapies like quorum-sensing inhibitors (QSIs) and antibiofilm peptides aim to block bacterial communication or dismantle biofilm structures, which helps lower resistance. Phage therapy also shows promise by targeting bacteria that produce biofilms. In healthcare, preventing biofilm formation is critical to avoiding infections related to medical devices, implants, and chronic wounds. Strategies include antibiotic-coated device surfaces, enzymes that disrupt biofilms in wound care, and nanomaterials such as nanosilver to hinder biofilm growth. Ongoing research highlights multi-targeted biofilm inhibitors to combat antimicrobial resistance and improve outcomes for chronic infections and industrial biofilm control.

Data Availability: No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Conflict of interest: The author declares no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this chapter.

Acknowledgement: Special thanks are extended to the Department of Pharmaceutics, NIMS Institute of Pharmacy, NIMS University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India, for providing the necessary facilities and support. The author also acknowledges the valuable support from colleagues and family, whose encouragement and insights were instrumental in completing this chapter.

Abbreviations

EPS: Extracellular Polymeric Substances

QSI: Quorum Sensing Inhibitors

AMPs: Anti-Microbial Peptides

QS: Quorum Sensing

Pages: Bacteriophages

DNAse: Deoxyribonuclease

CRISPR: Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats

CAR T cell: Chimeric Antigen Receptor T cell

HIV: Human Immunodeficiency Virus

AIDS: Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome

ROS: Reactive Oxygen Species

AMR: Antimicrobial Resistance

 

References

(1) Sharma, S.; Mohler, J.; Mahajan, S. D.; Schwartz, S. A.; Bruggemann, L.; Aalinkeel, R. Microbial Biofilm: A Review on Formation, Infection, Antibiotic Resistance, Control Measures, and Innovative Treatment. Microorganisms 2023, 11 (6), 1614. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11061614 PMid:37375116 PMCid:PMC10305407

(2) Lebeaux, D.; Ghigo, J.-M.; Beloin, C. Biofilm-Related Infections: Bridging the Gap between Clinical Management and Fundamental Aspects of Recalcitrance toward Antibiotics. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2014, 78 (3), 510-543. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.00013-14 PMid:25184564 PMCid:PMC4187679

(3) Kunnath, A. P.; Suodha Suoodh, M.; Chellappan, D. K.; Chellian, J.; Palaniveloo, K. Bacterial Persister Cells and Development of Antibiotic Resistance in Chronic Infections: An Update. Br. J. Biomed. Sci. 2024, 81, 12958. https://doi.org/10.3389/bjbs.2024.12958 PMid:39170669 PMCid:PMC11335562

(4) Mirghani, R.; Saba, T.; Khaliq, H.; Mitchell, J.; Do, L.; Chambi, L.; Diaz, K.; Kennedy, T.; Alkassab, K.; Huynh, T.; Elmi, M.; Martinez, J.; Sawan, S.; Rijal, G. Biofilms: Formation, Drug Resistance and Alternatives to Conventional Approaches. AIMS Microbiol. 2022, 8 (3), 239-277. https://doi.org/10.3934/microbiol.2022019 PMid:36317001 PMCid:PMC9576500

(5) Asma, S. T.; Acaroz, U.; Imre, K.; Morar, A.; Shah, S. R. A.; Hussain, S. Z.; Arslan-Acaroz, D.; Demirbas, H.; Hajrulai-Musliu, Z.; Istanbullugil, F. R.; Soleimanzadeh, A.; Morozov, D.; Zhu, K.; Herman, V.; Ayad, A.; Athanassiou, C.; Ince, S. Natural Products/Bioactive Compounds as a Source of Anticancer Drugs. Cancers 2022, 14 (24), 6203. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14246203 PMid:36551687 PMCid:PMC9777303

(6) Ullah, A.; Munir, S.; Badshah, S. L.; Khan, N.; Ghani, L.; Poulson, B. G.; Emwas, A.-H.; Jaremko, M. Important Flavonoids and Their Role as a Therapeutic Agent. Molecules 2020, 25 (22), 5243. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25225243 PMid:33187049 PMCid:PMC7697716

(7) Heinrich, M.; Mah, J.; Amirkia, V. Alkaloids Used as Medicines: Structural Phytochemistry Meets Biodiversity-An Update and Forward Look. Molecules 2021, 26 (7), 1836. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26071836 PMid:33805869 PMCid:PMC8036335

(8) Masyita, A.; Mustika Sari, R.; Dwi Astuti, A.; Yasir, B.; Rahma Rumata, N.; Emran, T. B.; Nainu, F.; Simal-Gandara, J. Terpenes and Terpenoids as Main Bioactive Compounds of Essential Oils, Their Roles in Human Health and Potential Application as Natural Food Preservatives. Food Chem. X 2022, 13, 100217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fochx.2022.100217 PMid:35498985 PMCid:PMC9039924

(9) Bartnik, M.; Facey, P. Glycosides. In Pharmacognosy; Elsevier, 2024; pp 103-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-18657-8.00001-3

(10) Timilsena, Y. P.; Phosanam, A.; Stockmann, R. Perspectives on Saponins: Food Functionality and Applications. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24 (17), 13538. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241713538 PMid:37686341 PMCid:PMC10487995

(11) Beck, H.; Härter, M.; Haß, B.; Schmeck, C.; Baerfacker, L. Small Molecules and Their Impact in Drug Discovery: A Perspective on the Occasion of the 125th Anniversary of the Bayer Chemical Research Laboratory. Drug Discov. Today 2022, 27 (6), 1560-1574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2022.02.015 PMid:35202802

(12) Bhullar, K. S.; Lagarón, N. O.; McGowan, E. M.; Parmar, I.; Jha, A.; Hubbard, B. P.; Rupasinghe, H. P. V. Kinase-Targeted Cancer Therapies: Progress, Challenges and Future Directions. Mol. Cancer 2018, 17 (1), 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-018-0804-2 PMid:29455673 PMCid:PMC5817855

(13) Cvetkovic, R. S.; Goa, K. L. Lopinavir/Ritonavir: A Review of Its Use in the Management of HIV Infection. Drugs 2003, 63 (8), 769-802. https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200363080-00004 PMid:12662125

(14) Cunningham, A. D.; Qvit, N.; Mochly-Rosen, D. Peptides and Peptidomimetics as Regulators of Protein-Protein Interactions. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2017, 44, 59-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbi.2016.12.009 PMid:28063303 PMCid:PMC5496809

(15) Vadevoo, S. M. P.; Gurung, S.; Lee, H.-S.; Gunassekaran, G. R.; Lee, S.-M.; Yoon, J.-W.; Lee, Y.-K.; Lee, B. Peptides as Multifunctional Players in Cancer Therapy. Exp. Mol. Med. 2023, 55 (6), 1099-1109. https://doi.org/10.1038/s12276-023-01016-x PMid:37258584 PMCid:PMC10318096

(16) Strzelec, M.; Detka, J.; Mieszczak, P.; Sobocińska, M. K.; Majka, M. Immunomodulation-a General Review of the Current State-of-the-Art and New Therapeutic Strategies for Targeting the Immune System. Front. Immunol. 2023, 14, 1127704. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1127704 PMid:36969193 PMCid:PMC10033545

(17) Luong, H. X.; Thanh, T. T.; Tran, T. H. Antimicrobial Peptides - Advances in Development of Therapeutic Applications. Life Sci. 2020, 260, 118407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2020.118407 PMid:32931796 PMCid:PMC7486823

(18) Wang, S.; Zhao, Y.; Breslawec, A. P.; Liang, T.; Deng, Z.; Kuperman, L. L.; Yu, Q. Strategy to Combat Biofilms: A Focus on Biofilm Dispersal Enzymes. Npj Biofilms Microbiomes 2023, 9 (1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41522-023-00427-y PMid:37679355 PMCid:PMC10485009

(19) Kalia, V. C.; Patel, S. K. S.; Lee, J.-K. Bacterial Biofilm Inhibitors: An Overview. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2023, 264, 115389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2023.115389 PMid:37634478

(20) Bowden, L. C.; Finlinson, J.; Jones, B.; Berges, B. K. Beyond the Double Helix: The Multifaceted Landscape of Extracellular DNA in Staphylococcus Aureus Biofilms. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2024, 14, 1400648. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2024.1400648 PMid:38903938 PMCid:PMC11188362

(21) Ramírez-Larrota, J. S.; Eckhard, U. An Introduction to Bacterial Biofilms and Their Proteases, and Their Roles in Host Infection and Immune Evasion. Biomolecules 2022, 12 (2), 306. https://doi.org/10.3390/biom12020306 PMid:35204806 PMCid:PMC8869686

(22) Kim, J.-S.; Lim, M.-C.; Kim, S.-M.; Lee, J.-Y. Extracellular Matrix-Degrading Enzymes as a Biofilm Control Strategy for Food-Related Microorganisms. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2023, 32 (12), 1745-1761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-023-01373-3 PMid:37780595 PMCid:PMC10533455

(23) Srinivasan, R.; Santhakumari, S.; Poonguzhali, P.; Geetha, M.; Dyavaiah, M.; Xiangmin, L. Bacterial Biofilm Inhibition: A Focused Review on Recent Therapeutic Strategies for Combating the Biofilm Mediated Infections. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 676458. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.676458 PMid:34054785 PMCid:PMC8149761

(24) Zhang, K.; Li, X.; Yu, C.; Wang, Y. Promising Therapeutic Strategies Against Microbial Biofilm Challenges. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2020, 10, 359. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2020.00359 PMid:32850471 PMCid:PMC7399198

(25) Bano, S.; Hassan, N.; Rafiq, M.; Hassan, F.; Rehman, M.; Iqbal, N.; Ali, H.; Hasan, F.; Kang, Y.-Q. Biofilms as Battlefield Armor for Bacteria against Antibiotics: Challenges and Combating Strategies. Microorganisms 2023, 11 (10), 2595. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11102595 PMid:37894253 PMCid:PMC10609369

(26) Grooters, K. E.; Ku, J. C.; Richter, D. M.; Krinock, M. J.; Minor, A.; Li, P.; Kim, A.; Sawyer, R.; Li, Y. Strategies for Combating Antibiotic Resistance in Bacterial Biofilms. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2024, 14, 1352273. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2024.1352273 PMid:38322672 PMCid:PMC10846525

(27) Ciarolla, A. A.; Lapin, N.; Williams, D.; Chopra, R.; Greenberg, D. E. Physical Approaches to Prevent and Treat Bacterial Biofilm. Antibiotics 2022, 12 (1), 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12010054 PMid:36671255 PMCid:PMC9854850

(28) LuTheryn, G.; Glynne‐Jones, P.; Webb, J. S.; Carugo, D. Ultrasound‐mediated Therapies for the Treatment of Biofilms in Chronic Wounds: A Review of Present Knowledge. Microb. Biotechnol. 2020, 13 (3), 613-628. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.13471 PMid:32237219 PMCid:PMC7111087

(29) Sant'Ana, A. S.; Silva, F. F. P.; Maffei, D. F.; Franco, B. D. G. M. FRUITS AND VEGETABLES | Introduction. In Encyclopedia of Food Microbiology; Elsevier, 2014; pp 972-982. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384730-0.00427-4

(30) Li, X.; Sun, L.; Zhang, P.; Wang, Y. Novel Approaches to Combat Medical Device-Associated BioFilms. Coatings 2021, 11 (3), 294. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11030294

(31) Rodríguez-Urretavizcaya, B.; Vilaplana, L.; Marco, M.-P. Strategies for Quorum Sensing Inhibition as a Tool for Controlling Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Infections. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2024, 64 (5), 107323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2024.107323 PMid:39242051

(32) Balducci, E.; Papi, F.; Capialbi, D. E.; Del Bino, L. Polysaccharides' Structures and Functions in Biofilm Architecture of Antimicrobial-Resistant (AMR) Pathogens. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24 (4), 4030. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24044030 PMid:36835442 PMCid:PMC9965654

(33) Regen, S. L. Membrane-Disrupting Molecules as Therapeutic Agents: A Cautionary Note. JACS Au 2021, 1 (1), 3-7. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacsau.0c00037 PMid:34467266 PMCid:PMC8395607

(34) Uddin, T. M.; Chakraborty, A. J.; Khusro, A.; Zidan, B. R. M.; Mitra, S.; Emran, T. B.; Dhama, K.; Ripon, Md. K. H.; Gajdács, M.; Sahibzada, M. U. K.; Hossain, Md. J.; Koirala, N. Antibiotic Resistance in Microbes: History, Mechanisms, Therapeutic Strategies and Future Prospects. J. Infect. Public Health 2021, 14 (12), 1750-1766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2021.10.020 PMid:34756812

(35) Spencer, A. C.; Panda, S. S. DNA Gyrase as a Target for Quinolones. Biomedicines 2023, 11 (2), 371. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11020371 PMid:36830908 PMCid:PMC9953508

(36) Wang, R.; Lan, C.; Benlagha, K.; Camara, N. O. S.; Miller, H.; Kubo, M.; Heegaard, S.; Lee, P.; Yang, L.; Forsman, H.; Li, X.; Zhai, Z.; Liu, C. The Interaction of Innate Immune and Adaptive Immune System. MedComm 2024, 5 (10), e714. https://doi.org/10.1002/mco2.714 PMid:39286776 PMCid:PMC11401974

(37) Zhao, A.; Sun, J.; Liu, Y. Understanding Bacterial Biofilms: From Definition to Treatment Strategies. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2023, 13, 1137947. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2023.1137947 PMid:37091673 PMCid:PMC10117668

(38) Zafer, M. M.; Mohamed, G. A.; Ibrahim, S. R. M.; Ghosh, S.; Bornman, C.; Elfaky, M. A. Biofilm-Mediated Infections by Multidrug-Resistant Microbes: A Comprehensive Exploration and Forward Perspectives. Arch. Microbiol. 2024, 206 (3), 101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-023-03826-z PMid:38353831 PMCid:PMC10867068

(39) Vestby, L. K.; Grønseth, T.; Simm, R.; Nesse, L. L. Bacterial Biofilm and Its Role in the Pathogenesis of Disease. Antibiotics 2020, 9 (2), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9020059 PMid:32028684 PMCid:PMC7167820

(40) Razdan, K.; Garcia-Lara, J.; Sinha, V. R.; Singh, K. K. Pharmaceutical Strategies for the Treatment of Bacterial Biofilms in Chronic Wounds. Drug Discov. Today 2022, 27 (8), 2137-2150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2022.04.020 PMid:35489675

(41) Mitra, A. Combatting Biofilm-Mediated Infections in Clinical Settings by Targeting Quorum Sensing. Cell Surf. 2024, 12, 100133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcsw.2024.100133 PMid:39634722 PMCid:PMC11615143

(42) Ramakrishnan, R.; Singh, A. K.; Singh, S.; Chakravortty, D.; Das, D. Enzymatic Dispersion of Biofilms: An Emerging Biocatalytic Avenue to Combat Biofilm-Mediated Microbial Infections. J. Biol. Chem. 2022, 298 (9), 102352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102352 PMid:35940306 PMCid:PMC9478923

(43) Kang, X.; Yang, X.; He, Y.; Guo, C.; Li, Y.; Ji, H.; Qin, Y.; Wu, L. Strategies and Materials for the Prevention and Treatment of Biofilms. Mater. Today Bio 2023, 23, 100827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtbio.2023.100827 PMid:37859998 PMCid:PMC10582481

(44) Sahli, C.; Moya, S. E.; Lomas, J. S.; Gravier-Pelletier, C.; Briandet, R.; Hémadi, M. Recent Advances in Nanotechnology for Eradicating Bacterial Biofilm. Theranostics 2022, 12 (5), 2383-2405. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.67296 PMid:35265216 PMCid:PMC8899562

(45) Ghosh, S.; Sinha, J. K.; Ghosh, S.; Sharma, H.; Bhaskar, R.; Narayanan, K. B. A Comprehensive Review of Emerging Trends and Innovative Therapies in Epilepsy Management. Brain Sci. 2023, 13 (9), 1305. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13091305 PMid:37759906 PMCid:PMC10527076

(46) Blanchard, A. C.; Waters, V. J. Opportunistic Pathogens in Cystic Fibrosis: Epidemiology and Pathogenesis of Lung Infection. J. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. Soc. 2022, 11 (Supplement_2), S3-S12. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpids/piac052 PMid:36069904

(47) Afonso, A. C.; Oliveira, D.; Saavedra, M. J.; Borges, A.; Simões, M. Biofilms in Diabetic Foot Ulcers: Impact, Risk Factors and Control Strategies. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22 (15), 8278. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22158278 PMid:34361044 PMCid:PMC8347492

(48) Ul Haq, I.; Khan, T. A.; Krukiewicz, K. Etiology, Pathology, and Host-Impaired Immunity in Medical Implant-Associated Infections. J. Infect. Public Health 2024, 17 (2), 189-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2023.11.024 PMid:38113816

(49) Pietrocola, G.; Campoccia, D.; Motta, C.; Montanaro, L.; Arciola, C. R.; Speziale, P. Colonization and Infection of Indwelling Medical Devices by Staphylococcus Aureus with an Emphasis on Orthopedic Implants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23 (11), 5958. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23115958 PMid:35682632 PMCid:PMC9180976

(50) Bogadi, S.; Rao, P.; Ku, V.; Kuppusamy, G.; Madhunapantula, S. V.; Subramaniyan, V.; Satyanarayana Reddy Karri, V. V.; Aswathanarayan, J. B. Management of Biofilm-Associated Infections in Diabetic Wounds - from Bench to Bedside. Pure Appl. Chem. 2024, 96 (10), 1351-1374. https://doi.org/10.1515/pac-2023-1117

(51) Yin, R.; Cheng, J.; Wang, J.; Li, P.; Lin, J. Treatment of Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Infectious Biofilms: Challenges and Strategies. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 955286. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.955286 PMid:36090087 PMCid:PMC9459144

(52) Gupta, P.; Mankere, B.; Chekkoora Keloth, S.; Tuteja, U.; Pandey, P.; Chelvam, K. T. Increased Antibiotic Resistance Exhibited by the Biofilm of Vibrio Cholerae O139. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2018, 73 (7), 1841-1847. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dky127 PMid:29688490

(53) Kadirvelu, L.; Sivaramalingam, S. S.; Jothivel, D.; Chithiraiselvan, D. D.; Karaiyagowder Govindarajan, D.; Kandaswamy, K. A Review on Antimicrobial Strategies in Mitigating Biofilm-Associated Infections on Medical Implants. Curr. Res. Microb. Sci. 2024, 6, 100231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crmicr.2024.100231 PMid:38510214 PMCid:PMC10951465

(54) Macesic, N.; Uhlemann, A.-C.; Peleg, A. Y. Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections. The Lancet 2025, 405 (10474), 257-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)02081-6 PMid:39826970

(55) Manoharan, A.; Das, T.; Whiteley, G. S.; Glasbey, T.; Kriel, F. H.; Manos, J. The Effect of N-Acetylcysteine in a Combined Antibiofilm Treatment against Antibiotic-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2020, 75 (7), 1787-1798. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkaa093 PMid:32363384

(56) Young, J.; Lee, S. W.; Shariyate, M. J.; Cronin, A.; Wixted, J. J.; Nazarian, A.; Rowley, C. F.; Rodriguez, E. K. Bacteriophage Therapy and Current Delivery Strategies for Orthopedic Infections: A SCOPING Review. J. Infect. 2024, 88 (3), 106125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2024.106125 PMid:38373574

(57) Sahoo, K.; Meshram, S. Biofilm Formation in Chronic Infections: A Comprehensive Review of Pathogenesis, Clinical Implications, and Novel Therapeutic Approaches. Cureus 2024. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.70629

(58) Cendra, M. D. M.; Torrents, E. Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Biofilms and Their Partners in Crime. Biotechnol. Adv. 2021, 49, 107734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2021.107734 PMid:33785375

(59) Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Z. The History and Advances in Cancer Immunotherapy: Understanding the Characteristics of Tumor-Infiltrating Immune Cells and Their Therapeutic Implications. Cell. Mol. Immunol. 2020, 17 (8), 807-821. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41423-020-0488-6 PMid:32612154 PMCid:PMC7395159

(60) Singh, K.; Sethi, P.; Datta, S.; Chaudhary, J. S.; Kumar, S.; Jain, D.; Gupta, J. K.; Kumar, S.; Guru, A.; Panda, S. P. Advances in Gene Therapy Approaches Targeting Neuro-Inflammation in Neurodegenerative Diseases. Ageing Res. Rev. 2024, 98, 102321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2024.102321 PMid:38723752

(61) Ayilara, M. S.; Babalola, O. O. Bioremediation of Environmental Wastes: The Role of Microorganisms. Front. Agron. 2023, 5, 1183691. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2023.1183691