ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2009
Differential Sensitivity of Lactobacillus spp. to Inhibition by Candidate Topical Microbicides.
Article in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polyethylene glycol-based hydrogels for controlled release of the antimicrobial subtilosin for prophylaxis of bacterial vaginosis.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preclinical evaluation of vaginal microbicides includes screening against lactobacilli. However, there is no consensus regarding the species to be tested. This study was carried out to determine if results with one species would apply to other species, and to evaluate the utility of turbidometry as a screening tool. One current (PPCM; previously designated sulfuric acid-modified mandelic acid, SAMMA) and two former (cellulose sulfate, CS; and polystyrene sulfonate, PSS) candidate microbicides were evaluated. Bacterial growth was measured turbidometrically and by direct cell count. No microbicide affected Lact. gasseri, measured by either method. Apparent inhibition of Lact. jensenii by CS, PSS, and PPCM, and of Lact. crispatus by CS, occurred with turbidometric measurement. This was not substantiated with direct cell count. PSS and PPCM inhibited Lact. crispatus and Lact. acidophilus with both methods. These findings agree with results from vaginal isolates, which included Lact. gasseri, jensenii, acidophillus, crispatus, rhamnosis, casei, and paracasei. We conclude that sensitivities of similar lactobacilli to at least three microbicides are different. A single species is inadequate for screening vaginal products. Turbidometric evaluation is a sensitive, but not specific, screening method. We recommend that this method be used to screen candidate microbicides against several species of prevalent Lactobacillus species as an initial measure of microbicide safety evaluation.
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.