ArticlePloS one2014
In vivo efficacy of the combination of ciprofloxacin and cefotaxime against Vibrio vulnificus sepsis.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thiazole substitution of a labile amide bond-a new option toward antiplasmodial pantothenamide-mimics.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025Article
- Review
- Indomethacin Combined with Ciprofloxacin Improves the Prognosis of Mice under Severe Traumatic Infection via the PI3K/Akt Pathway in Macrophages.Inflammation · 2024Article
- In vitro antibacterial effects of combination of ciprofloxacin with compounds isolated from Streptomyces luteireticuli NIIST-D75.The Journal of antibiotics · 2023Article
- Article
- 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
- Vibrio vulnificus infection: a persistent threat to public health.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2018Review
- Efficacy of Ceftriaxone, Cefepime, Doxycycline, Ciprofloxacin, and Combination Therapy for Vibrio vulnificus Foodborne Septicemia.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2017Article
- Relative frequency, characteristics, and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Vibrio spp., Aeromonas spp., Chromobacterium violaceum, and Shewanella spp. in the northern territory of Australia, 2000-2013.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2015Article
- pH level as a marker for predicting death among patients with Vibrio vulnificus infection, South Korea, 2000-2011.Emerging infectious diseases · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe in vivo efficacy of a cefotaxime-ciprofloxacin combination against Vibrio vulnificus and the effects on rtxA1 expression of commonly used antibiotics are unknown.
methodsIn vitro time-kill studies were performed to evaluate synergism. Female BALB/c mice were injected subcutaneously with 1×10(7) or 1×10(8) cfu of V. vulnificus. Antibiotic therapy was initiated at 2 h after inoculation in the following four therapy groups: cefotaxime; ciprofloxacin; cefotaxime-plus-ciprofloxacin; and cefotaxime-plus-minocycline. The cytotoxicity of V. vulnificus for HeLa cells was measured using the lactate dehydrogenase assay; rtxA1 transcription was measured in a transcriptional reporter strain using a β-galactosidase assay.
resultsIn vitro time-kill assays exhibited synergism between cefotaxime and ciprofloxacin. In the animal experiments, the 96-h survival rate for the cefotaxime-plus-ciprofloxacin group (85%; 17/20) was significantly higher than that of the cefotaxime-plus-minocycline (35%; 7/20) and cefotaxime alone (0%; 0/20) groups (P<0.05 for both). Bacterial counts in the liver and spleen were significantly lower in the cefotaxime-plus-ciprofloxacin group 24 and 48 h after treatment, relative to the other groups. At sub-inhibitory concentrations, ciprofloxacin inhibited more effectively rtxA1 transcription and mammalian cell cytotoxicity than either minocycline or cefotaxime (P<0.05 for both).
conclusionsCiprofloxacin is more effective at reducing rtxA1 transcription and subsequent cytotoxicity than either minocycline or cefotaxime, and the combination of ciprofloxacin and cefotaxime was more effective in clearing V. vulnificus in vivo than previously used regimens. These data suggest that the combination of ciprofloxacin and cefotaxime is an effective option for the treatment of V. vulnificus sepsis in humans.
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.