Effect of ovotransferrin, protamine sulfate and EDTA combination on biofilm formation by catheter-associated bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To determine the effect of a composition comprising ovotransferrin (OT), protamine sulfate (PS) and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) on biofilm formation by catheter-associated bacteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: The in vitro activity of OT, PS and EDTA alone and in combinations against biofilm formation by Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Proteus mirabilis, Enterococcus faecalis and Staphylococcus epidermidis was investigated. All the three compounds either alone or in combinations failed to inhibit the growth completely at the concentrations tested. However, the subinhibitory concentrations of three compounds in a composition showed synergistic inhibitory effect on biofilm formation by K. pneumoniae, Ps. aeruginosa and S. epidermidis. Furthermore, 79-95% reduction in Ps. aeruginosa and S. epidermidis biofilm formation was observed in a clear vinyl urinary catheter treated with the composition. CONCLUSION: The subinhibitory concentrations of OT, PS and EDTA in a composition were effective in reducing biofilm formation by catheter-associated bacteria. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: This study shows that a synergistic composition-comprising non-antibiotic generally regarded as safe (GRAS) compounds such as OT, PS and EDTA may be used in the prevention of catheter-related infections.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".