Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25451050›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2015

In vitro resistance studies with bacteria that exhibit low mutation frequencies: prediction of "antimutant" linezolid concentrations using a mixed inoculum containing both susceptible and resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Alexander A Firsov, Maria V Golikova, Elena N Strukova, Yury A Portnoy, Andrey V Romanov, Mikhail V Edelstein, Stephen H Zinner

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexander A FirsovDepartment of Pharmacokinetics & Pharmacodynamics, Gause Institute of New Antibiotics, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russia firsov@dol.ru.
Maria V GolikovaDepartment of Pharmacokinetics & Pharmacodynamics, Gause Institute of New Antibiotics, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Elena N StrukovaDepartment of Pharmacokinetics & Pharmacodynamics, Gause Institute of New Antibiotics, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Yury A PortnoyDepartment of Pharmacokinetics & Pharmacodynamics, Gause Institute of New Antibiotics, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Andrey V RomanovInstitute of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, Smolensk State Medical Academy, Smolensk, Russia.
Mikhail V EdelsteinInstitute of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, Smolensk State Medical Academy, Smolensk, Russia.
Stephen H ZinnerMount Auburn Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Gause Institute of New Antibiotics Russian Academy of Medical Sciences · RUSmolensk State Medical University · RUHarvard University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial resistance studies using in vitro dynamic models are highly dependent on the starting inoculum that might or might not contain spontaneously resistant mutants (RMs). To delineate concentration-resistance relationships with linezolid-exposed Staphylococcus aureus, a mixed inoculum containing both susceptible cells and RMs was used. An RM selected after the 9th passage of the parent strain (MIC, 2 μg/ml) on antibiotic-containing media (RM9; MIC, 8 μg/ml) was chosen for the pharmacodynamic studies, because the mutant prevention concentration (MPC) of linezolid against the parent strain in the presence of RM9 at 10(2) (but not at 10(4)) CFU/ml did not differ from the MPC value determined in the absence of the RMs. Five-day treatments with twice-daily linezolid doses were simulated at concentrations either between the MIC and MPC or above the MPC. S. aureus RMs (resistant to 2× and 4×MIC but not 8× and 16×MIC) were enriched at ratios of the 24-h area under the concentration-time curve (AUC24) to the MIC that provide linezolid concentrations between the MIC and MPC for 100% (AUC24/MIC, 60 h) and 86% (AUC24/MIC, 120 h) of the dosing interval. No such enrichment occurred when linezolid concentrations were above the MIC and below the MPC for a shorter time (37% of the dosing interval; AUC24/MIC, 240 h) or when concentrations were consistently above the MPC (AUC24/MIC, 480 h). These findings obtained using linezolid-susceptible staphylococci supplemented with RMs support the mutant selection window hypothesis. This method provides an option to delineate antibiotic concentration-resistance relationships with bacteria that exhibit low mutation frequencies.

Indexed as

AcetamidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsLinezolidMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMutation RateOxazolidinonesStaphylococcus aureusAcetamidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsLinezolidOxazolidinones

Identifiers

PMID25451050
PMCPMC4335834
OpenAlexW2098835103

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.