Mechanistic Understanding Enables the Rational Design of Salicylanilide Combination Therapies for Gram-Negative Infections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a critical need for more-effective treatments to combat multidrug-resistant Gram-negative infections. Combination therapies are a promising strategy, especially when these enable existing clinical drugs to be repurposed as antibiotics. We examined the mechanisms of action and basis of innate Gram-negative resistance for the anthelmintic drug niclosamide and subsequently exploited this information to demonstrate that niclosamide and analogs kill Gram-negative bacteria when combined with antibiotics that inhibit drug efflux or permeabilize membranes. We confirm the synergistic potential of niclosamide in vitro against a diverse range of recalcitrant Gram-negative clinical isolates and in vivo in a mouse abscess model. We also demonstrate that nitroreductases can confer resistance to niclosamide but show that evolution of these enzymes for enhanced niclosamide resistance confers a collateral sensitivity to other clinical antibiotics. Our results highlight how detailed mechanistic understanding can accelerate the evaluation and implementation of new combination therapies.
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".