Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31601845›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

In vitro Antimicrobial Activity of Acne Drugs Against Skin-Associated Bacteria.

Mark A T Blaskovich, Alysha G Elliott, Angela M Kavanagh, Soumya Ramu, Matthew A Cooper

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Characterization and Engineering Studies of a New Endolysin from theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Indonesian MangroveMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  19. In Vitro Antimicrobial Activity ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mark A T BlaskovichInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia. m.blaskovich@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9447-2292
Alysha G ElliottInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2983-0484
Angela M KavanaghInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia.
Soumya RamuInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia.
Matthew A CooperInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3147-3460
The University of Queensland · AU

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust (Wellcome) 094977/Z/10/ZWellcome Trust (Wellcome) 104797/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acne is a common skin affliction that involves excess sebum production and modified lipid composition, duct blockage, colonization by bacteria, and inflammation. Acne drugs target one or more of these steps, with antibiotics commonly used to treat the microbial infection for moderate to severe cases. Whilst a number of other acne therapies are purported to possess antimicrobial activity, this has been poorly documented in many cases. We conducted a comparative analysis of the activity of common topical acne drugs against the principal etiological agent associated with acne: the aerotolerant anaerobic Gram-positive organism Propionibacterium acnes (recently renamed as Cutibacterium acnes). We also assessed their impact on other bacteria that could also be affected by topical treatments, including both antibiotic-sensitive and antibiotic-resistant strains, using broth microdilution assay conditions. Drugs designated specifically as antibiotics had the greatest potency, but lost activity against resistant strains. The non-antibiotic acne agents did possess widespread antimicrobial activity, including against resistant strains, but at substantially higher concentrations. Hence, the antimicrobial activity of non-antibiotic acne agents may provide protection against a background of increased drug-resistant bacteria.

Indexed as

Acne VulgarisAdministration, CutaneousAnti-Bacterial AgentsDermatologic AgentsDrug Resistance, BacterialHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMicrobiotaPropionibacterium acnesSkinAnti-Bacterial AgentsDermatologic Agents

Identifiers

PMID31601845
PMCPMC6787063
OpenAlexW2979597747

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.