ArticleInfection and drug resistance2025
Exploring the TEM β-Lactamase in
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) caused by Purpose: In this study, we analyzed a single Methods: The Results: Molecular docking analysis revealed that first-generation cephalosporins, such as cefazolin and cephalothin, exhibited strong binding affinities to TEM-1 β-lactamase (ΔG ≈ -8 kcal/mol) yet were resistant in vitro testing, indicating susceptibility to enzymatic hydrolysis. In contrast, second to fourth-generation cephalosporins (eg, cefuroxime, cefotaxime, cefepime) maintained similar binding energies but demonstrated sensitivity, suggesting enhanced structural resistance to β-lactamase. Aminoglycosides and fluoroquinolones showed varying binding affinities but retained in vitro activity, likely due to their distinct mechanisms targeting ribosomes or DNA gyrase, unaffected by TEM-1. Carbapenems, with lower binding energies, remained effective, consistent with their known β-lactamase resistance. These findings highlight the complexity of resistance, where binding energy alone does not determine antibiotic efficacy. Conclusion: Molecular docking and dynamics simulations revealed that later-generation cephalosporins, carbapenems and aminoglycosides exhibit stable binding and structural resilience against TEM-1 β-lactamase. Despite strong docking and stable interactions observed for first-generation cephalosporins, their clinical inefficacy is due to enzymatic hydrolysis. These findings emphasize that integrating computational binding and stability data with structural and clinical insights is crucial for predicting effective antibiotics against TEM-1-mediated resistance.
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.