In vitro activity of ivermectin against Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Ivermectin is an endectocide against many parasites. Though being a macrocyclic lactone, its activity against bacteria has been less known, possibly due to the fact that micromolar concentrations at tissue levels are required to achieve a therapeutic effect. Among pathogenic bacteria of major medical significance, Staphylococcus aureus cause a number of diseases in a wide variety of hosts including humans and animals. It has been attributed as one of the most pathogenic organisms. The emergence of methicillin resistance has made the treatment of S. aureus even more difficult as it is now resistant to most of the available antibiotics. Thus, search for alternate anti-staphylococcal agents requires immediate attention. Methods Twenty-one clinical isolates of S. aureus were isolated from bovine milk collected from Lahore and Faisalabad Pakistan. Different anthelmintics including levamisole, albendazole and ivermectin were tested against S. aureus to determine their minimum inhibitory concentrations. This was followed-up by growth curve analysis, spot assay and time-kill kinetics. Results The results showed that ivermectin but not levamisole or albendazole exhibited a potent anti-staphylococcal activity at the concentrations of 6.25 and 12.5 μg/ml against two isolates. Interestingly, one of the isolate was sensitive while the other was resistant to methicillin/cefoxitin. Conclusions Our novel findings indicate that ivermectin has an anti-bacterial effect against certain S . aureus isolates. However, to comprehend why ivermectin did not inhibit the growth of all Staphylococci needs further investigation. Nevertheless, we have extended the broad range of known pharmacological effects of ivermectin. As pharmacology and toxicology of ivermectin are well known, its further development as an anti-staphylococcal agent is potentially appealing.
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".