Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25897961›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Repurposing salicylanilide anthelmintic drugs to combat drug resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Rajmohan Rajamuthiah, Beth Burgwyn Fuchs, Annie L Conery, Wooseong Kim, Elamparithi Jayamani, Bumsup Kwon, Frederick M Ausubel, Eleftherios Mylonakis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

84 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 151 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Old drugs, new weapons: current trends in repurposing therapies against antimicrobial resistance.Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rajmohan RajamuthiahDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rhode Island Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America; Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Beth Burgwyn FuchsDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rhode Island Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Annie L ConeryMassachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Wooseong KimDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rhode Island Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Elamparithi JayamaniDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rhode Island Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America; Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Bumsup KwonDivision of Neurology, Rhode Island Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Frederick M AusubelMassachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Eleftherios MylonakisDivision of Infectious Diseases, Rhode Island Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America; Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Rhode Island Hospital · USBrown University · USHarvard University · US

Funding

Technical Mother Machine CoreP01AI083214 · NIAID · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Michael S Gilmore · 2009 to 2026
$39.4M
Identifying novel anti-infectives by high through-put screening in whole animalsR01AI085581 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI AUSUBEL, FREDERICK M · 2009 to 2013
$4.7M
Impact of Racism on Risk of Preterm Birth in Black WomenR01HD058510 · NICHD · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI MISRA, DAWN P · 2009 to 2013
$2.4M
NIAID NIH HHS P01 AI083214NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI085581NICHD NIH HHS R01HD058510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus is a Gram-positive bacterium that has become the leading cause of hospital acquired infections in the US. Repurposing Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drugs for antimicrobial therapy involves lower risks and costs compared to de novo development of novel antimicrobial agents. In this study, we examined the antimicrobial properties of two commercially available anthelmintic drugs. The FDA approved drug niclosamide and the veterinary drug oxyclozanide displayed strong in vivo and in vitro activity against methicillin resistant S. aureus (minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC): 0.125 and 0.5 μg/ml respectively; minimum effective concentration: ≤ 0.78 μg/ml for both drugs). The two drugs were also effective against another Gram-positive bacteria Enterococcus faecium (MIC 0.25 and 2 μg/ml respectively), but not against the Gram-negative species Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacter aerogenes. The in vitro antimicrobial activity of niclosamide and oxyclozanide were determined against methicillin, vancomycin, linezolid or daptomycin resistant S. aureus clinical isolates, with MICs at 0.0625-0.5 and 0.125-2 μg/ml for niclosamide and oxyclozanide respectively. A time-kill study demonstrated that niclosamide is bacteriostatic, whereas oxyclozanide is bactericidal. Interestingly, oxyclozanide permeabilized the bacterial membrane but neither of the anthelmintic drugs exhibited demonstrable toxicity to sheep erythrocytes. Oxyclozanide was non-toxic to HepG2 human liver carcinoma cells within the range of its in vitro MICs but niclosamide displayed toxicity even at low concentrations. These data show that the salicylanilide anthelmintic drugs niclosamide and oxyclozanide are suitable candidates for mechanism of action studies and further clinical evaluation for treatment of staphylococcal infections.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnthelminticsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCell SurvivalDrug RepositioningDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialEnterococcus faeciumErythrocytesGram-Negative BacteriaHep G2 CellsHumansMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMicrobial ViabilityNiclosamideOxyclozanideAnthelminticsAnti-Bacterial AgentsNiclosamideOxyclozanide

Identifiers

PMID25897961
PMCPMC4405337
OpenAlexW1991471402

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.