<i>In vitro</i> activity of ozenoxacin against <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> and <i>Streptococcus pyogenes</i> clinical isolates recovered in a worldwide multicentre study (2020–2022)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives We performed a multicentre study (2020–2022) to compare the in vitro activity of ozenoxacin and comparator agents against Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes clinical isolates from skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTI). Methods A total of 1725 isolates (1454 S. aureus and 271 S. pyogenes) were collected in 10 centres from eight countries between January 2020 and December 2022. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was determined (microdilution-SENSITITRE). Results were interpreted following European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) 2023 (clinical breakpoints, ECOFF) and CLSI criteria. Results Ozenoxacin exhibited high in vitro activity against S. aureus (MIC50/90 = 0.002/0.12 mg/L) and S. pyogenes (MIC50/90 = 0.015/0.03 mg/L), inhibiting 99% of the isolates at MIC ≤ 0.5 mg/L and at MIC ≤ 0.06, respectively. The most active comparators against S. aureus were retapamulin (MIC90 = 0.12 mg/L), fusidic acid (MIC90 = 0.25 mg/L) and mupirocin (MIC90 = 0.5 mg/L); and against S. pyogenes were retapamulin (MIC90 = 0.03 mg/L), clindamycin (MIC90 = 0.12 mg/L) and mupirocin (MIC90 = 0.25 mg/L). Ciprofloxacin and methicillin resistant rates for S. aureus were 31.3% (455/1454) and 41% (598/1454), respectively. Additionally, 62% (373/598) of the MRSA were also ciprofloxacin non-susceptible, whereas only 10% (23/271) of the MSSA were ciprofloxacin resistant. Ozenoxacin was more active against ciprofloxacin-susceptible S. aureus than against ciprofloxacin-resistant isolates, and showed a slightly higher MIC in MRSA isolates than in MSSA. However, ozenoxacin activity was comparable in both ciprofloxacin-resistant MSSA and MRSA subsets. On the other hand, ozenoxacin had similar activity in ciprofloxacin-susceptible and resistant S. pyogenes isolates. Conclusions Ozenoxacin is a potent antimicrobial agent of topic use against Gram-positive bacteria causing SSTI, including MRSA isolates non-susceptible to ciprofloxacin.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".