ArticleHeliyon2016
In vivo efficacy of humanized high dose meropenem and comparators against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates producing verona integron-encoded metallo-β-lactamase (VIM).
Article in Heliyon, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Navigating the complexities of drug development for metallo-β-lactamase inhibitors.RSC medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
- Activity of β-Lactam Antibiotics against Metallo-β-Lactamase-ProducingAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe aimed to describe the in vivo efficacy of meropenem, in addition to cefepime and levofloxacin as comparators against VIM-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa and compare the findings to our previous observations with Enterobacteriaceae.
methodsEight clinical P. aeruginosa isolates with meropenem MICs from 4 to 512 mg/L were studied in a murine neutropenic thigh infection model. Animals were treated with doses of the antibiotics to simulate the human exposure of meropenem 2 g q8 h 30-min infusion, cefepime 2 g q8 h 30-min infusion and levofloxacin 500 mg q24 h. After 24 hours, the animals were euthanized and efficacy was calculated as the change in thigh bacterial density (log10 CFU) relative to the starting inoculum (0 h).
resultsAs expected, levofloxacin was ineffective against all isolates due to their resistant phenotype (8 to>64 mg/L). Cefepime also showed minimal activity against all isolates consistent with its failure to achieve pharmacodynamic target exposures due to high MICs of 32 to>512 mg/L. In the presence of low MICs (4 to 16 mg/L), the fT> MIC of meropenem was sufficiently high to result in CFU reductions. However, conflicting activity was noted for isolates with MICs = 128 mg/L that possessed the same enzymatic profile, suggesting that other mechanisms of resistance are responsible for driving CFU outcomes. No activity was noted for organisms with a meropenem MIC = 512 mg/L.
conclusionUnlike previous observations with MBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae that showed discordance between in vitro resistance and in vivo efficacy in the murine infection model, we found that the efficacy of humanized cefepime and meropenem was generally concordant with the phenotypic profile of VIM-producing P. aeruginosa.
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.