Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16189100›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2005

Antistaphylococcal activity of ceftobiprole, a new broad-spectrum cephalosporin.

Tatiana Bogdanovich, Lois M Ednie, Stuart Shapiro, Peter C Appelbaum

Open access · greenAbstract 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 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 182 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. A phase 3 randomized double-blind comparison of ceftobiprole medocaril versus ceftazidime plus linezolid for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2014
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. A unique class of ZnNature communications · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Ceftobripole: Experience in staphylococcal bacteremia.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2019
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Comparative activity of ceftobiprole against coagulase-negative staphylococci from the BSAC Bacteraemia Surveillance Programme, 2013-2015.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tatiana BogdanovichDepartment of Pathology, Hershey Medical Center, PA 17033, USA.
Lois M Ednie
Stuart Shapiro
Peter C Appelbaum
Hershey (United States) · USBasilea Pharmaceutica (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ceftobiprole (formerly BAL9141), the active component of the prodrug BAL5788 (ceftobiprole medocaril), is a novel cephalosporin with expanded activity against gram-positive bacteria. Among 152 Staphylococcus aureus isolates, including 5 vancomycin-intermediate and 2 vancomycin-resistant strains, MIC(50) and MIC(90) values for ceftobiprole were each 0.5 microg/ml against methicillin-susceptible strains and 2 mug/ml against methicillin-resistant strains. Against 151 coagulase-negative staphylococci (including 4 vancomycin-intermediate strains), MIC(50) and MIC(90) values were, respectively, 0.125 microg/ml and 1 microg/ml against methicillin-susceptible and 1 microg/ml and 2 microg/ml against methicillin-resistant strains. Teicoplanin was less active than vancomycin against coagulase-negative strains. Linezolid, quinupristin-dalfopristin, and daptomycin were active against all strains, whereas increased MICs for amoxicillin-clavulanate, cefazolin, minocycline, gentamicin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, levofloxacin, rifampin, mupirocin, fusidic acid, and fosfomycin were sometimes observed. At 2x MIC, ceftobiprole was bactericidal against 11 of 12 test strains by 24 h. Prolonged serial passage in the presence of subinhibitory concentrations of ceftobiprole failed to select for clones with MICs >4 times those of the parents; the maximum MIC achieved for ceftobiprole after 50 passages (in 1 of 10 strains) was 8 mug/ml. Single-passage selections showed very low frequencies of resistance to ceftobiprole irrespective of genotype or phenotype; the maximal ceftobiprole MIC of recovered clones was 8 mug/ml.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCephalosporinsDrug Resistance, BacterialGram-Positive BacteriaMicrobial Sensitivity TestsStaphylococcus aureusAnti-Bacterial AgentsceftobiproleCephalosporins

Identifiers

PMID16189100
PMCPMC1251547
OpenAlexW2128053708

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.