Liposome-mediated gentamicin delivery: development and activity against resistant strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from cystic fibrosis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Chronic pulmonary infection by Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis patients is virtually impossible to eradicate by means of existing free antibiotics. We sought to assess the antibacterial activities of liposomal gentamicin against clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa. METHODS: Gentamicin was encapsulated into liposomes with different lipid compositions (1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine and 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine) and cholesterol in the molar ratio of 2:1 by sonication. The in vitro stability of liposome-encapsulated gentamicin was studied over a 48 h period at 4 and 37 degrees C in PBS and at 37 degrees C in pooled plasma. The MICs of free and liposomal gentamicin for clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa were assessed by broth dilution. RESULTS: The encapsulation efficiency of all liposomal preparations was 4%-5.18% of the initial amount of the drug in solution. The liposomes retained 60%-70% of the encapsulated gentamicin for 48 h when they were incubated in normal human pooled plasma or PBS at 4 or 37 degrees C. The MICs of liposomal gentamicin for all clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa were lower than the MICs of free gentamicin. Importantly, liposomal gentamicin altered the susceptibilities of these clinical isolates from gentamicin resistant to either intermediate or susceptible. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these data indicate that liposomal gentamicin formulations could be more effective than the free drug in controlling pulmonary infections due to P. aeruginosa.
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".