Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35473561›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2022

Antibacterial activities and action mode of anti-hyperlipidemic lomitapide against Staphylococcus aureus.

Yufang Zhang, Yiying Zhang, Chengchun Chen, Hang Cheng, Xiangbin Deng, Duoyun Li, Bing Bai, Zhijian Yu, Qiwen Deng, Jie Guo and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

11 authors.

Yufang Zhang *Department of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China.
Yiying Zhang *Department of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China.
Chengchun Chen *Department of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China.
Hang ChengDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China.
Xiangbin DengDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China.
Duoyun LiDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China.
Bing BaiDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China.
Zhijian YuDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China.
Qiwen DengDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China. qiwendeng@hotmail.com.
Jie GuoDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China. 15699204528@163.com.
Zewen WenDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Shenzhen Key Lab of Endogenous Infection, Shenzhen Nanshan People's Hospital and the 6th affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Shenzhen, 518052, China. wenzw05@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increasing emergence of multidrug-resistant Gram-positive bacterial infections necessitates new antibacterial agents with novel mechanisms of action that can be used to treat these infections. Lomitapide has been approved by FDA for years in reducing levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) in cases of familial hypercholesterolemia, whereas the antibacterial effect of lomitapide remains elusive. In this study, the inhibitory activities of lomitapide against Gram-positive bacteria were the first time explored. Quantitative proteomics analysis was then applied to investigate the mechanisms of action of lomitapide.

resultsThe minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values of lomitapide against Gram-positive bacteria including both methicillin sensitive and resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, and Streptococcus agalactiae were range 12.5-50 μM. Moreover, lomitapide also inhibited anti-biofilm activity against clinical S. aureus isolates. A total of 106 proteins with > 1.5-fold changes in expression were identified upon 1/2 × MIC lomitapide exposure, including 83 up-regulated proteins and 23 down-regulated proteins. Based on bioinformatics analysis, the expression of cell wall damage response proteins including two-component system VraS/VraR, lipoteichoic acid (LPA) D-alanylnation related proteins D-alanyl carrier protein (dltC) and carrier protein ligase (dltA), methionine sulfoxide reductases (mrsA1 and mrsB) were up-regulated. Moreover, the expression of SaeS and multiple fibrinogen-binding proteins (SAOUHSC_01110, FnBPB, SAOUHSC_02802, SdrC, SdrD) which were involved in the bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation, was inhibited by lomitapide. Furthermore, VraS/VraR deletion mutant (ΔvraSR) showed an enhanced lomitapide sensitivity phenotype.

conclusionLomitapide displayed broad antimicrobial activities against Gram-positive bacteria. The antibacterial effect of lomitapide may be caused by cell wall destruction, while the anti-biofilm activity may be related to the inhibition of surface proteins.

Indexed as

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusStaphylococcal InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBenzimidazolesCarrier ProteinsGram-Positive BacteriaHumansStaphylococcus aureusAnti-Bacterial AgentsBenzimidazolesBMS201038Carrier ProteinsBiofilm formationLomitapideQuantitative proteomicsS. aureus

Identifiers

PMID35473561
PMCPMC9040290

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.