Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31088525›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2019

Evaluation of emodepside in laboratory models of human intestinal nematode and schistosome infections.

Tanja Karpstein, Valérian Pasche, Cécile Häberli, Ivan Scandale, Anna Neodo, Jennifer Keiser

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Differential Emodepside Efficacy in Drug-Resistant and Drug-SusceptibleTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Evaluation of the in vitro susceptibility of various filarial nematodes to emodepside.International journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Where are all the anthelmintics? Challenges and opportunities on the path to new anthelmintics.International journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance · 2020
    Article
  12. Whipworm and roundworm infections.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2020
    Review
  13. 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.

Tanja KarpsteinDepartment of Medical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Valérian PascheDepartment of Medical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Cécile HäberliDepartment of Medical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Ivan ScandaleDrugs for Neglected Disease initiative, Chemin Louis-Dunant 15, 1202, Geneva, Switzerland.
Anna NeodoDepartment of Medical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Jennifer KeiserDepartment of Medical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland. jennifer.keiser@swisstph.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0290-3521

Funding

H2020 European Research Council 614739-A_HERO
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHelminthiases are very prevalent worldwide, yet their treatment and control rely on a handful of drugs. Emodepside, a marketed broad-spectrum veterinary anthelminthic with a unique mechanism of action, undergoing development for onchocerciasis is an interesting anthelmintic drug candidate. We tested the in vitro and in vivo activity of emodepside on nematode species that serve as models for human soil-transmitted helminth infection as well as on schistosomes.

methodsIn vitro viability assays were performed over a time course of 72 hours for Trichuris muris, Necator americanus, Ancylostoma ceylanicum, Heligmosomoides polygyrus, Strongyloides ratti, Schistosoma mansoni and Schistosoma haematobium. The drug effect was determined by the survival rate for the larvae and by phenotypical scores for the adult worms. Additionally, mice infected with T. muris and hamsters harboring hookworm infection (N. americanus or A. ceylanicum) were administered orally with emodepside at doses ranging from 1.25 to 75 mg/kg. Expelled worms in the feces were counted until 3 days post-drug intake and worms residing in the intestines were collected and counted after dissection.

resultsAfter 24 hours, emodepside was very active in vitro against both larval and adult stages of the nematodes T. muris, A. ceylanicum, N. americanus, H. polygyrus and S. ratti (IC

conclusionsEmodepside is highly active against a broad range of nematode species both in vitro and in vivo. The development of emodepside for treating soil-transmitted helminth infections should be pursued.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAnimalsAnthelminticsCricetinaeDepsipeptidesDisease Models, AnimalDrug RepositioningFecesFemaleHookworm InfectionsHumansMaleMesocricetusMiceMice, Inbred C57BLNecator americanusAnthelminticsDepsipeptidesemodepsideDrug repurposingEmodepsideHookwormsNematodesSchistosoma spp.Soil-transmitted helminthiases (STH)TrematodesTrichuris spp.

Identifiers

PMID31088525
PMCPMC6515646

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.