ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2004
Efficacy of garenoxacin in treatment of experimental endocarditis due to Staphylococcus aureus or viridans group streptococci.
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Induction of virulence gene expression in Staphylococcus aureus by pulmonary surfactant.Infection and immunity · 2014Article
- Garenoxacin treatment of experimental endocarditis caused by viridans group streptococci.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2006Article
- Topical versus systemic vancomycin for deep sternal wound infection caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a rodent experimental model.Texas Heart Institute journal · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The activity of garenoxacin was investigated in rats with experimental endocarditis due to staphylococci and viridans group streptococci (VGS). The staphylococci tested comprised one ciprofloxacin-susceptible and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) isolate (isolate 1112), one ciprofloxacin-susceptible but methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) isolate (isolate P8), and one ciprofloxacin-resistant mutant (grlA) of P8 (isolate P8-4). The VGS tested comprised one penicillin-susceptible isolate and one penicillin-resistant isolate (Streptococcus oralis 226 and Streptococcus mitis 531, respectively). To simulate the kinetics of drugs in humans, rats were infused intravenously with garenoxacin every 24 h (peak and trough levels in serum, 6.1 and 1.0 mg/liter, respectively; area under the concentration-time curve [AUC], 63.4 mg. h/liter) or levofloxacin every 12 h (peak and trough levels in serum, 7.3 and 1.5 mg/liter, respectively; AUC, 55.6 mg. h/liter) for 3 or 5 days. Flucloxacillin, vancomycin, and ceftriaxone were used as control drugs. Garenoxacin, levofloxacin, flucloxacillin, and vancomycin sterilized >/=70% of the vegetations infected with both ciprofloxacin-susceptible staphylococcal isolates (P < 0.05 versus the results for the controls). Garenoxacin and vancomycin also sterilized 70% of the vegetations infected with ciprofloxacin-resistant MRSA isolate P8-4, whereas treatment with levofloxacin failed against this organism (cure rate, 0%; P < 0.05 versus the results obtained with the comparator drugs). Garenoxacin did not select for resistant derivatives in vivo. In contrast, levofloxacin selected for resistant variants in four of six rats infected with MRSA isolate P8-4. Garenoxacin sterilized 90% of the vegetations infected with both penicillin-susceptible and penicillin-resistant isolates of VGS. Levofloxacin sterilized only 22 and 40% of the vegetations infected with penicillin-susceptible S. oralis 226 and penicillin-resistant S. mitis 531, respectively. Ceftriaxone sterilized only 40% of those infected with penicillin-resistant S. mitis 531 (P < 0.05 versus the results obtained with garenoxacin). No quinolone-resistant VGS were detected. In all the experiments successful quinolone treatment was predicted by specific pharmacodynamic criteria (D. R. Andes and W. A. Craig, Clin. Infect. Dis. 27:47-50, 1998). The fact that the activity of garenoxacin was equal or superior to those of the standard comparators against staphylococci and VGS indicates that it is a potential alternative for the treatment of infections caused by such bacteria.
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.