Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21321149›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2011

Antimicrobial activity of CXA-101, a novel cephalosporin tested in combination with tazobactam against Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Bacteroides fragilis strains having various resistance phenotypes.

Helio S Sader, Paul R Rhomberg, David J Farrell, Ronald N Jones

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 123 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. TargetingAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025
    Article
  9. Microbiology spectrum · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Ceftolozane/Tazobactam for Resistant DrugsLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Infection and drug resistance · 2018
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Helio S SaderJMI Laboratories, 345 Beaver Kreek Centre, Suite A, North Liberty, IA 52317, USA. helio-sader@jmilabs.com
Paul R Rhomberg
David J Farrell
Ronald N Jones
JMI Laboratories · USUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CXA-101, a novel oxyimino-aminothiazolyl cephalosporin, CXA-201 (CXA-101 combined with tazobactam), and various comparators were susceptibility tested by broth microdilution methods against 1,301 well-characterized clinical strains collected worldwide, including ceftazidime-resistant members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)- and extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Bacteroides fragilis. CXA-201 was 2- to 32-fold more active than ceftazidime and piperacillin-tazobactam against ceftazidime-resistant Enterobacteriaceae species but less active than cefepime for some species. CXA-101 and CXA-201 were very active against P. aeruginosa (MIC50, 1 μg/ml for both compounds), including imipenem-resistant strains.

Indexed as

Bacteroides fragilisCephalosporinsDrug Resistance, BacterialEnterobacteriaceaeMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPenicillanic AcidPseudomonas aeruginosaTazobactamceftolozaneCephalosporinsPenicillanic AcidTazobactam

Identifiers

PMID21321149
PMCPMC3088243
OpenAlexW2138299373

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.