Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35170719›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2022

Flomoxef and fosfomycin in combination for the treatment of neonatal sepsis in the setting of highly prevalent antimicrobial resistance.

Christopher A Darlow, Nicola Farrington, Adam Johnson, Laura McEntee, Jennifer Unsworth, Ana Jimenez-Valverde, Ruwanthi Kolamunnage-Dona, Renata M A Da Costa, Sally Ellis, François Franceschi and 5 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. IDCases · 2023
    Article
  12. 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

15 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Christopher A DarlowAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5400-3413
Nicola FarringtonAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.
Adam JohnsonAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.
Laura McEnteeAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.
Jennifer UnsworthAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.
Ana Jimenez-ValverdeAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.
Ruwanthi Kolamunnage-DonaDepartment of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.
Renata M A Da CostaGlobal Antibiotic Research and Development Partnership, 15 Chemin Camille-Vidart, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland.
Sally EllisGlobal Antibiotic Research and Development Partnership, 15 Chemin Camille-Vidart, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland.
François FranceschiGlobal Antibiotic Research and Development Partnership, 15 Chemin Camille-Vidart, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland.
Mike SharlandPaediatric Infectious Diseases Research Group, St George's, University of London, UK.
Michael NeelyChildren's Hospital Los Angeles and the Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Laura J V PiddockGlobal Antibiotic Research and Development Partnership, 15 Chemin Camille-Vidart, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-1460-473X
Shampa DasAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2540-4816
William HopeAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Health Partners, UK.
University of Liverpool · GBGlobal Antibiotic Research & Development Partnership · CHSt George's, University of London · GBUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

GARDPGerman Federal Ministry of Education and ResearchGerman Federal Ministry of HealthMédecins Sans FrontièresMedical Research Council MR/N025989/1Netherlands Ministry of Health, Welfare and SportNorth West England Medical Research Council Fellowship Scheme in Clinical Pharmacology and TherapeuticsUnited Kingdom Department for International DevelopmentUnited Kingdom National Institute of Health ResearchUniversity of LiverpoolUniversity of Manchester
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeonatal sepsis is a serious bacterial infection of neonates, globally killing up to 680 000 babies annually. It is frequently complicated by antimicrobial resistance, particularly in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings with widespread resistance to the WHO's recommended empirical regimen of ampicillin and gentamicin.

objectivesWe assessed the utility of flomoxef and fosfomycin as a potential alternative empirical regimen for neonatal sepsis in these settings.

methodsWe studied the combination in a 16-arm dose-ranged hollow-fibre infection model (HFIM) experiment and chequerboard assays. We further assessed the combination using clinically relevant regimens in the HFIM with six Enterobacterales strains with a range of flomoxef/fosfomycin MICs.

resultsPharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling of the HFIM experimental output, along with data from chequerboard assays, indicated synergy of this regimen in terms of bacterial killing and prevention of emergence of fosfomycin resistance. Flomoxef monotherapy was sufficient to kill 3/3 strains with flomoxef MICs ≤0.5 mg/L to sterility. Three of three strains with flomoxef MICs ≥8 mg/L were not killed by fosfomycin or flomoxef monotherapy; 2/3 of these were killed with the combination of the two agents.

conclusionsThese data suggest that flomoxef/fosfomycin could be an efficacious and synergistic regimen for the empirical treatment of neonatal sepsis in LMIC settings with prevalent antimicrobial resistance. Our HFIM results warrant further assessment of the flomoxef/fosfomycin combination in clinical trials.

Indexed as

FosfomycinNeonatal SepsisAnti-Bacterial AgentsCephalosporinsDrug Resistance, BacterialHumansInfant, NewbornMicrobial Sensitivity TestsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCephalosporinsflomoxefFosfomycin

Identifiers

PMID35170719
PMCPMC9047679
OpenAlexW4210515373

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.