In vitro Activity of Amphotericin B, Hamycin and Their Novel Water-Soluble Compounds against Pathogenic Yeasts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-eight pathogenic isolates, 4 each of Candida albicans, C. lusitaniae, C. parapsilosis, Cryptococcus neoformans, Torulopsis glabrata and Trichosporon beigelii were tested for their in vitro sensitivity to amphotericin B (AmB), hamycin (HA) and their novel water-soluble compounds, namely JAI-AmB (oral and injectable; patents pending) and JAI-HA (Jaimycin Inc., Walnut Creek, Calif., USA), using a standard double-dilution broth (1 ml/tube) procedure. The 2 novel compounds, namely JAI-AmB and JAI-HA, contain one twenty-fifth (w/w) of the AmB and HA, respectively. Results showed that the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of AmB for all species, except C. lusitaniae and Tr. beigelii (3.125-6.25 micrograms/ml), were 0.195-1.56 micrograms/ml. The values of JAI-AmB (oral) for C. albicans, C. parapsilosis, Cr. neoformans and To. glabrata ranged from 0.78 to 25 micrograms/ml. The MICs of JAI-AmB (oral) for the other yeasts were 100 micrograms/ml. All of the yeasts yielded higher MICs (3.125-100 micrograms/ml) against JAI-AmB (injectable) than the JAI-AmB (oral) preparation. Except for C. parapsilosis (MICs 25-100 micrograms/ml), all of the other species showed greater sensitivity to the parent HA (0.195-100 micrograms/ml) than AmB. The values for JAI-HA ranged from 0.195 to 100 micrograms/ml for all isolates, except C. tropicalis (100 micrograms/ml). Based on our in vitro findings, in vivo efficacies of JAI-AmB and JAI-HA should be carried out.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".