ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2012
Quantitative PCR and in vivo efficacy of antibiotics in the treatment of Vibrio vulnificus infection in a mouse model.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2012. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Outcomes of Third-Generation Cephalosporin Plus Ciprofloxacin or Doxycycline Therapy in Patients with Vibrio vulnificus Septicemia: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2019Article
- In vivo efficacy of the combination of ciprofloxacin and cefotaxime against Vibrio vulnificus sepsis.PloS one · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend oral or intravenous doxycycline plus a third-generation cephalosporin or fluoroquinolone alone for the treatment of Vibrio vulnificus infections. Until now, no study has compared oral with parenteral administered doxycycline with respect to their in vivo efficacy. In the present work, ICR mice infected with a high dose of V. vulnificus were administered ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone, and doxycycline. The bacterial DNA copy number in surviving and non-surviving mice was determined using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). In this setting, ciprofloxacin was the most effective monotherapeutic drug, but a higher survival rate (50%) was achieved using the combination therapy of intraperitoneal doxycycline plus ceftriaxone. The blood of non-surviving mice at 12 h post-infection contained at least 10(4) DNA copies/μL, in contrast to 10(2) to 10(3) DNA copies/μL in surviving mice. Thus, in the treatment of V. vulnificus infections in humans, when the intravenous form of doxycycline is unavailable, ciprofloxacin might be a better option than oral doxycycline to lower mortality. In addition, our results demonstrate that qPCR can be a useful tool for identifying the V. vulnificus load in infected patients, with the DNA copy number providing a marker of either disease severity or mortality.
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.