ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2003
In vivo efficacy of a new quinolone, DQ-113, against Streptococcus pneumoniae in a mouse model.
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unique fluoroalkyl substituents: is there life after CFChemical science · 2026Review
- Isobolographic analysis of pharmacodynamic interactions between antifungal agents and ciprofloxacin against Candida albicans and Aspergillus fumigatus.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2008Article
- In vitro studies with DQ-113 and comparison fluoroquinolones to determine propensities to select resistance in gram-positive cocci.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2007Article
- In vivo efficacies and pharmacokinetics of DX-619, a novel des-fluoro(6) quinolone, against Streptococcus pneumoniae in a mouse lung infection model.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
DQ-113 is a new quinolone with potent activity against gram-positive pathogens. The in vivo activity of DQ-113 against Streptococcus pneumoniae was compared with those of gatifloxacin and ciprofloxacin in a mouse model. For this purpose, two strains of S. pneumoniae were used: penicillin-susceptible S. pneumoniae (PSSP) and penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae (PRSP). The survival rates of mice infected with PSSP and PRSP at 14 days after infection were 80% in the DQ-113-treated group and 0 to 10% in the other three groups. In murine infections caused by PSSP, the 50% effective doses (ED50s) of DQ-113, gatifloxacin, and ciprofloxacin were 6.0, 41.3, and 131.6 mg/kg, respectively. Against PRSP-caused pneumonia in mice, the ED50s of DQ-113, gatifloxacin, and ciprofloxacin were 7.6, 64.7, and 125.9 mg/kg, respectively. Compared with the other drugs, DQ-113 showed excellent therapeutic efficacy and eradicated viable bacteria in both PSSP- and PRSP-infected mice. The means +/- standard errors of the means of viable bacterium counts in the lungs of gatifloxacin-treated, ciprofloxacin-treated, and untreated control mice infected with PSSP were 2.91 +/- 0.34, 3.13 +/- 0.48, and 3.86 +/- 0.80 log10 CFU/ml, respectively. The same counts in mice infected with PRSP treated with the same three agents were 6.57 +/- 0.99, 6.54 +/- 0.40, and 7.17 +/- 0.43 log10 CFU/ml, respectively. DQ-113 significantly decreased the number of viable bacteria in the lungs compared with gatifloxacin and ciprofloxacin. Of the drugs analyzed, the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic parameter of area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)/MIC ratio for DQ-113 was significantly higher than those for gatifloxacin and ciprofloxacin. Our results suggest that DQ-113 has potent in vivo efficacy against both PSSP and PRSP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.