Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26267376›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Assessments of Thioridazine as a Helper Compound to Dicloxacillin against Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: In Vivo Trials in a Mouse Peritonitis Model.

Michael Stenger, Kristoffer Hendel, Peter Bollen, Peter B Licht, Hans Jørn Kolmos, Janne K Klitgaard

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Effect of 5-fluorouracil onFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. A Novel Promazine Derivative Shows HighFrontiers in microbiology · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael StengerResearch Unit of Clinical Microbiology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Kristoffer HendelResearch Unit of Clinical Microbiology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Peter BollenBiomedical Laboratory, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Peter B LichtDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Hans Jørn KolmosResearch Unit of Clinical Microbiology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Janne K KlitgaardResearch Unit of Clinical Microbiology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
University of Southern Denmark · DKOdense University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe rise in antimicrobial resistance is a major global concern and requires new treatment strategies. The use of helper compounds, such as thioridazine (TDZ), an antipsychotic drug, in combination with traditional antibiotics must be investigated.

objectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of TDZ as a helper compound for dicloxacillin (DCX) against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in vivo, and compare the combination treatment of DCX+TDZ with vancomycin (VAN).

methodsMice were inoculated with an intraperitoneal (IP) injection of MRSA (108 CFU) and treated in a 12-hour cycle for 48 hours. By termination, bacterial quantities in a peritoneal flush, spleen and kidneys were obtained. In the main trial the drugs were administered subcutaneously in five treatment groups: 1) DCX, 2) TDZ, 3) DCX+TDZ, 4) VAN, 5) SALINE. Additional smaller studies with IP administration and higher subcutaneous dosages (×1.5 and ×4) of the drugs were subsequently performed.

resultsIn the main trial no significant differences were found between DCX+TDZ and DCX or TDZ alone (p≥0.121-0.999). VAN performed significantly better than DCX+TDZ on all bacteriological endpoints (p<0.001). Higher subcutaneous dosages of DCX and TDZ improved the antibacterial efficacy, but the combination treatment was still not significantly better than monotherapy. IP drug administration of DCX+TDZ revealed a significantly better antibacterial effect than DCX or TDZ alone (p<0.001) but not significantly different from VAN (p>0.999).

conclusionIn conclusion, TDZ did not prove to be a viable helper compound for dicloxacillin against MRSA in subcutaneous systemic treatment. However, IP-administration of DCX+TDZ, directly at the infection site resulted in a synergetic effect, with efficacy comparable to that of VAN.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsDicloxacillinDisease Models, AnimalDoublecortin ProteinFemaleMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicePeritonitisStaphylococcal InfectionsThioridazineAnti-Bacterial AgentsDcx protein, mouseDicloxacillinDoublecortin ProteinThioridazine

Identifiers

PMID26267376
PMCPMC4534400
OpenAlexW2120916723

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.