Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16048934›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2005

Comparison of four methods for determining lysostaphin susceptibility of various strains of Staphylococcus aureus.

Caroline M Kusuma, John F Kokai-Kun

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Selective Eradication ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  18. Thermophile Lytic Enzyme Fusion Proteins that TargetAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Caroline M KusumaBiosynexus Incorporated, 9119 Gaither Rd., Gaithersburg, MD 20877. johnkun@biosynexus.com.
John F Kokai-Kun
Integrated BioTherapeutics (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lysostaphin is an endopeptidase that cleaves the pentaglycine cross-bridges of the staphylococcal cell wall rapidly lysing the bacteria. Recently, lysostaphin has been examined for its potential to treat infections and to clear Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization, requiring a reliable method for determining the lysostaphin susceptibility of strains of S. aureus. We compared four methods for determining the lysostaphin susceptibility of 57 strains of methicillin-sensitive S. aureus, methicillin-resistant S. aureus, vancomycin intermediately susceptible S. aureus (VISA), mupirocin-resistant S. aureus, and various defined genetic mutants of S. aureus. Three reference lysostaphin-resistant S. aureus variants were also included in the assays as negative controls. The assays examined included turbidity, MIC, minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC), and disk diffusion assays. All of the strains of S. aureus tested, including a VISA strain which had previously been reported to be lysostaphin resistant, were susceptible to lysostaphin by all four methods. The three reference lysostaphin-resistant variants were resistant by all four methods. The disk diffusion assay was the simplest method to differentiate lysostaphin-susceptible S. aureus strains from lysostaphin-resistant variants, while the MBC assay could be used as a follow-up assay if required. In the disk diffusion assay, all strains of S. aureus tested revealed zones of inhibition of >/=11 mm using a 50-microg lysostaphin disk, while the three reference lysostaphin-resistant S. aureus variants had no zones of inhibition. In MBC assays, concentrations of lysostaphin ranging from 0.16 microg/ml to 2.5 microg/ml were found to cause a 3 log or greater drop from the initial CFU of S. aureus within 30 min for all strains tested.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCulture MediaHumansLysostaphinMethicillinMethicillin ResistanceMicrobial Sensitivity TestsStaphylococcus aureusVancomycinVancomycin ResistanceAnti-Bacterial AgentsCulture MediaLysostaphinMethicillinVancomycin

Identifiers

PMID16048934
PMCPMC1196283
OpenAlexW2119147681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.