ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2006
In vivo efficacies and pharmacokinetics of DX-619, a novel des-fluoro(6) quinolone, against Streptococcus pneumoniae in a mouse lung infection model.
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2006. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lack of effect of DX-619, a novel des-fluoro(6)-quinolone, on glomerular filtration rate measured by serum clearance of cold iohexol.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2007Trial
- A strain-independent method to induce progressive and lethal pneumococcal pneumonia in neutropenic mice.Journal of biomedical science · 2015Article
- Sitafloxacin: in bacterial infections.Drugs · 2011Review
- Intracellular penetration and activity of DX-619 in human polymorphonuclear leukocytes.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
DX-619 is a novel des-fluoro(6) quinolone with potent activity against gram-positive pathogens. The in vivo activity of DX-619 against Streptococcus pneumoniae was compared with those of fluoro(6) quinolones, sitafloxacin, and ciprofloxacin in a mouse model. Two strains of S. pneumoniae were used: a penicillin-sensitive S. pneumoniae (PSSP) strain and a penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae (PRSP) strain. Furthermore, these strains showed intermediate susceptibilities to ciprofloxacin. In murine lung infections caused by PSSP, the 50% effective doses (ED50s) of DX-619, sitafloxacin, and ciprofloxacin were 9.15, 11.1, and 127.6 mg/kg of body weight, respectively. Against PRSP-mediated pneumonia in mice, the ED50s of DX-619, sitafloxacin, and ciprofloxacin were 0.69, 4.84, and 38.75 mg/kg, respectively. The mean +/- standard error of the mean viable bacterial counts in murine lungs infected with PSSP and treated with DX-619, sitafloxacin, ciprofloxacin (10 mg/kg twice daily), and saline (twice daily) were 1.75 +/- 0.06, 1.92 +/- 0.23, 6.48 +/- 0.28, and 7.57 +/- 0.13 log10 CFU/ml, respectively. Furthermore, the numbers of viable bacteria in lungs infected with PRSP and treated with the three agents and not treated (control) were 1.73 +/- 0.04, 2.28 +/- 0.17, 4.61 +/- 0.59, and 5.54 +/- 0.72 log10 CFU/ml, respectively. DX-619 and sitafloxacin significantly decreased the numbers of viable bacteria in the lungs compared to the numbers in the lungs of ciprofloxacin-treated and untreated mice. The pharmacokinetic parameter of the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)/MIC ratio in the lungs for DX-619, sitafloxacin, and ciprofloxacin were 171.0, 21.92, and 1.22, respectively. The AUC/MIC ratio in the lungs was significantly higher for DX-619 than for sitafloxacin and ciprofloxacin. Our results suggest that DX-619 and sitafloxacin are potent against both PSSP and PRSP in our mouse pneumonia model.
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.