ArticleScientific reports2024
Aerosolized delivery of ESKAPE pathogens for murine pneumonia models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeting the Energy-Coupling Factor Transporters: A Novel Antibiotic Drug Target inJournal of medicinal chemistry · 2026Article
- Exploiting Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Methods for Optimizing and Accelerating Drug Development of Innovative Anti-Infectives.ChemMedChem · 2026Review
- Characterization of a Phage-Encoded Depolymerase AgainstViruses · 2025Article
- Innovative nebulization delivery of lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated siRNA: a therapeutic advance for Staphylococcus aureus-induced pneumonia.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Murine pneumonia models for ESKAPE pathogens serve to evaluate novel antibacterials or to investigate immunological responses. The majority of published models uses intranasal or to a limited extent the intratracheal instillation to challenge animals. In this study, we propose the aerosol delivery of pathogens using a nebulizer. Aerosol delivery typically results in homogeneous distribution of the inoculum in the lungs because of lower particle size. This is of particular importance when compounds are assessed for their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) relationships as it allows to conduct several analysis with the same sample material. Moreover, aerosol delivery has the advantage that it mimics the 'natural route' of respiratory infection. In this short and concise study, we show that aerosol delivery of pathogens resulted in a sustained bacterial burden in the neutropenic lung infection model for five pathogens tested, whereas it gave a similar result in immunocompetent mice for three out of five pathogens. Moreover, a substantial bacterial burden in the lungs was already achieved 2 h post inhalation. Hence, this study constitutes a viable alternative for intranasal administration and a refinement of murine pneumonia models for PK/PD assessments of novel antibacterial compounds allowing to study multiple readouts with the same sample material.
Indexed as
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.