PAMAM-dendrimer Enhanced Antibacterial Effect of Vancomycin Hydrochloride Against Gram-Negative Bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The antibacterial activity of some antibiotics is specific to either Gram-positive or Gram-negative bacteria. There are different mechanisms behind such insensitivities like inability of antibiotics to permeate through some bacterial membranes, as is the case for vancomycin in Gram-negative bacteria. The present investigation tries to overcome this problem by dendrimers, in order to make Gram-negative bacteria responsive to vancomycin. METHODS: The effects of generations 3 (G3) and 5 (G5) polyamidoamine amine-terminated dendrimers (NH2-PAMAM), on the antibacterial activity of vancomycin, were evaluated. Vancomycin-PAMAM dendrimers complexes were prepared and their antibacterial activities were evaluated by determination of their "minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC)", "minimum bactericidal concentration" and "fractional inhibitory concentration index" values against two Gram-positive and four Gram-negative bacteria, using broth micro-dilution method. The complexation of vancomycin and dendrimers was also assessed by in vitro release studies across dialysis tubing using a developed HPLC method. RESULTS: Results showed that vancomycin solution was effective against Gram-positive bacteria, but, was not effective in Gram-negative ones. Vancomycin-PAMAM dendrimers exhibited significant antibacterial efficacy against Gram-negative bacteria resulting in a decline of vancomycin MIC values by about 2, 2, 4 and 64 times in E. coli, K. pneumonia, S. typhimurium and P. aeruginosa, respectively. Results also showed that enhanced effect by G5 is more than G3. Dendrimers did not affect antibacterial activity of vancomycin in Gram-positive bacteria, as no permeation problem exists here. CONCLUSIONS: The present study revealed that both G3 and G5 cationic PAMAM dendrimers are able to make Gram-negative bacteria sensitive to vancomycin, resulting in decline of MIC values up to 64 times, possibly by increasing its permeation through bacterial membrane. These results look promising for broadening the antibacterial spectrum of vancomycin and such a strategy might be used for increasing the overall life of antibiotics.
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".