Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30254421›Full record

ArticleDrug design, development and therapy2018

In vitro and in vivo evaluation of cephalosporins for the treatment of Lyme disease.

Venkata Raveendra Pothineni, Mansi B Parekh, Mustafeez Mujtaba Babar, Aditya Ambati, Peter Maguire, Mohammed Inayathullah, Kwang-Min Kim, Lobat Tayebi, Hari-Hara Sk Potula, Jayakumar Rajadas

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug design, development and therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 50% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Persistent Borrelia burgdorferiClinical microbiology reviews · 2022
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Venkata Raveendra PothineniBiomaterials and Advanced Drug Delivery, Stanford Cardiovascular Pharmacology Division, Cardiovascular Institute, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA, jayraja@stanford.edu.
Mansi B ParekhBiomaterials and Advanced Drug Delivery, Stanford Cardiovascular Pharmacology Division, Cardiovascular Institute, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA, jayraja@stanford.edu.
Mustafeez Mujtaba BabarBiomaterials and Advanced Drug Delivery, Stanford Cardiovascular Pharmacology Division, Cardiovascular Institute, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA, jayraja@stanford.edu.
Aditya AmbatiCenter for Sleep Sciences and Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Peter MaguireBiomaterials and Advanced Drug Delivery, Stanford Cardiovascular Pharmacology Division, Cardiovascular Institute, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA, jayraja@stanford.edu.
Mohammed InayathullahBiomaterials and Advanced Drug Delivery, Stanford Cardiovascular Pharmacology Division, Cardiovascular Institute, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA, jayraja@stanford.edu.
Kwang-Min KimBiomaterials and Advanced Drug Delivery, Stanford Cardiovascular Pharmacology Division, Cardiovascular Institute, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA, jayraja@stanford.edu.
Lobat TayebiDepartment of Developmental Sciences, Marquette University School of Dentistry, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Hari-Hara Sk PotulaBiomaterials and Advanced Drug Delivery, Stanford Cardiovascular Pharmacology Division, Cardiovascular Institute, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA, jayraja@stanford.edu.
Jayakumar RajadasBiomaterials and Advanced Drug Delivery, Stanford Cardiovascular Pharmacology Division, Cardiovascular Institute, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA, jayraja@stanford.edu.
Cardiovascular Institute of the South · USMarquette University · USStanford Medicine · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLyme disease accounts for >90% of all vector-borne disease cases in the United States and affect ~300,000 persons annually in North America. Though traditional tetracycline antibiotic therapy is generally prescribed for Lyme disease, still 10%-20% of patients treated with current antibiotic therapy still show lingering symptoms.

methodsIn order to identify new drugs, we have evaluated four cephalosporins as a therapeutic alternative to commonly used antibiotics for the treatment of Lyme disease by using microdilution techniques like minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and the minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC). We have determined the MIC and MBC of four drugs for three Borrelia burgdorferi s.s strains namely CA8, JLB31 and NP40. The binding studies were performed using in silico analysis.

resultsThe MIC order of the four drugs tested is cefoxitin (1.25 µM/mL) > cefamandole (2.5 µM/mL), > cefuroxime (5 µM/mL) > cefapirin (10 µM/mL). Among the drugs that are tested in this study using in vivo C3H/HeN mouse model, cefoxitin effectively kills B. burgdorferi. The in silico analysis revealed that all four cephalosporins studied binds effectively to B. burgdorferi proteins, SecA subunit penicillin-binding protein (PBP) and Outer surface protein E (OspE).

conclusionBased on the data obtained, cefoxitin has shown high efficacy killing B. burgdorferi at concentration of 1.25 µM/mL. In addition to it, cefoxitin cleared B. burgdorferi infection in C3H/HeN mice model at 20 mg/kg.

Indexed as

AnimalsCephalosporinsComputer SimulationDisease Models, AnimalDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleHumansLyme DiseaseMiceMice, Inbred C3HMolecular Docking SimulationStructure-Activity RelationshipCephalosporinsantimicrobialsBorrelia burgdorferiLyme diseasepenicillin-binding proteins

Identifiers

PMID30254421
PMCPMC6141111
OpenAlexW2890834285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.