ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2023
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Ototoxicity is a debilitating side effect of over 150 medications with diverse mechanisms of action, many of which could be taken concurrently to treat multiple conditions. Approaches for preclinical evaluation of drug interactions that might impact ototoxicity would facilitate design of safer multi-drug regimens and mitigate unsafe polypharmacy by flagging combinations that potentially cause adverse interactions for monitoring. They may also identify protective agents that antagonize ototoxic injury. To address this need, we have developed a novel workflow that we call Parallelized Evaluation of Protection and Injury for Toxicity Assessment (PEPITA), which empowers high-throughput, semi-automated quantification of ototoxicity and otoprotection in zebrafish larvae. By applying PEPITA to characterize ototoxic drug interaction outcomes, we have discovered antagonistic interactions between macrolide and aminoglycoside antibiotics that confer protection against aminoglycoside-induced damage to lateral line hair cells in zebrafish larvae. Co-administration of either azithromycin or erythromycin in zebrafish protected against damage from a broad panel of aminoglycosides, at least in part via inhibiting drug uptake into hair cells via a mechanism independent from hair cell mechanotransduction. Conversely, combining macrolides with aminoglycosides in bacterial inhibition assays does not show antagonism of antimicrobial efficacy. The proof-of-concept otoprotective antagonism suggests that combinatorial interventions can potentially be developed to protect against other forms of toxicity without hindering on-target drug efficacy.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.