ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2024
Activity of antibiotics against Burkholderia cepacia complex in artificial sputum medium.
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBurkholderia cepacia complex (Bcc) is a collection of intrinsically drug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria that cause life-threatening disease in people with cystic fibrosis (CF). Standard antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods have poor predictive value for clinical outcomes in Bcc infections, probably due in part to differences between in vitro testing conditions and the environment in which Bcc grow in the lungs of people with CF.
objectivesTo compare the activity of commonly used antibiotics under standard in vitro testing conditions with activity in conditions mimicking those found in vivo.
methodsTwo Bcc strains were grown alone and with six different antibiotics (minocycline, ceftazidime, meropenem, tobramycin, levofloxacin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole) in two different media: standard cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth and an artificial sputum medium designed to simulate the environment in the lungs of people with CF through addition of components including mucin, free DNA and amino acids. Two different starting conditions were used for time-kill assays: a standard ∼5 × 106 cfu/mL inoculum, and a high-density inoculum in which bacteria were grown for 72 hours before addition of antibiotics. Growth detection was performed by colony enumeration and by detection of resazurin reduction.
resultsThere were major discrepancies between standard susceptibility results and activity in our models. Some antibiotics, including ceftazidime, showed minimal activity in all time-kill assays despite low minimal inhibitory concentrations, while others, notably tobramycin, were more active in high-density growth conditions than in standard time-kill assays.
conclusionsThis work underscores the urgent need to develop more clinically relevant susceptibility testing approaches for Bcc.
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.