Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23516649›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2013

Microbiological, histological, immunological, and toxin response to antibiotic treatment in the mouse model of Mycobacterium ulcerans disease.

Fred Stephen Sarfo, Paul J Converse, Deepak V Almeida, Jihui Zhang, Clive Robinson, Mark Wansbrough-Jones, Jacques H Grosset

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Pharmacologic management ofExpert review of clinical pharmacology · 2020
    Review
  4. The Many Hosts of Mycobacteria 8 (MHM8): A conference report.Tuberculosis (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2020
    Review
  5. Review
  6. In Vivo Imaging of BioluminescentThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Fred Stephen SarfoKomfo Anokye Teaching Hospital, Kumasi, Ghana.
Paul J Converse
Deepak V Almeida
Jihui Zhang
Clive Robinson
Mark Wansbrough-Jones
Jacques H Grosset
St George's, University of London · GBJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Firing up new treatments against Mycobacterium ulcerans disease (Buruli ulcer)R01AI082612 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GROSSET, JACQUES H. · 2009 to 2013
$2.0M
Medical Research Council MR/J01477X/1NIAID NIH HHS R01-AI.082612
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mycobacterium ulcerans infection causes a neglected tropical disease known as Buruli ulcer that is now found in poor rural areas of West Africa in numbers that sometimes exceed those reported for another significant mycobacterial disease, leprosy, caused by M. leprae. Unique among mycobacterial diseases, M. ulcerans produces a plasmid-encoded toxin called mycolactone (ML), which is the principal virulence factor and destroys fat cells in subcutaneous tissue. Disease is typically first manifested by the appearance of a nodule that eventually ulcerates and the lesions may continue to spread over limbs or occasionally the trunk. The current standard treatment is 8 weeks of daily rifampin and injections of streptomycin (RS). The treatment kills bacilli and wounds gradually heal. Whether RS treatment actually stops mycolactone production before killing bacilli has been suggested by histopathological analyses of patient lesions. Using a mouse footpad model of M. ulcerans infection where the time of infection and development of lesions can be followed in a controlled manner before and after antibiotic treatment, we have evaluated the progress of infection by assessing bacterial numbers, mycolactone production, the immune response, and lesion histopathology at regular intervals after infection and after antibiotic therapy. We found that RS treatment rapidly reduced gross lesions, bacterial numbers, and ML production as assessed by cytotoxicity assays and mass spectrometric analysis. Histopathological analysis revealed that RS treatment maintained the association of the bacilli with (or within) host cells where they were destroyed whereas lack of treatment resulted in extracellular infection, destruction of host cells, and ultimately lesion ulceration. We propose that RS treatment promotes healing in the host by blocking mycolactone production, which favors the survival of host cells, and by killing M. ulcerans bacilli.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial LoadBuruli UlcerCell SurvivalDisease Models, AnimalHistocytochemistryMacrolidesMass SpectrometryMiceMice, Inbred BALB CMycobacterium ulceransRifampinStreptomycinAnti-Bacterial AgentsMacrolidesmycolactoneRifampinStreptomycin

Identifiers

PMID23516649
PMCPMC3597478
OpenAlexW2082831907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.