ライフサイエンスコーパス: TMP-SMX

1 TMP-SMX administration significantly reduced liver stage

2 TMP-SMX inhibited development of rodent and P. falciparu

3 TMP-SMX is not gametocytocidal, but at prophylactic leve

4 olones (35%), followed by carbapenems (20%), TMP-SMX (18.5%), and ceftazidime (11%).

5 class 1 integron was found in 25 (93%) of 27 TMP-SMX-resistant CgA isolates but in only 43 (63%) of 6

6 n-CgA isolates (P < 0.001) and in none of 44 TMP-SMX-susceptible E. coli isolates (P < 0.0001).

7 tant CgA isolates but in only 43 (63%) of 68 TMP-SMX-resistant non-CgA isolates (P < 0.001) and in no

8 ) clindamycin-treated and 182 of 198 (91.9%) TMP-SMX-treated subjects (difference, 0.2%; 95% confiden

9 Among 95 TMP-SMX-resistant isolates, 68 and 27 isolates carried c

10 e was 39% against ciprofloxacin, 44% against TMP-SMX, and 25% against cefuroxime.

11 solate, and 5% were resistant to ampicillin, TMP-SMX, and chloramphenicol.

12 ngs where MRSA is prevalent, clindamycin and TMP-SMX produce similar cure and adverse event rates amo

13 gnificant difference between clindamycin and TMP-SMX, with respect to either efficacy or side-effect

14 tandard therapy for systemic listerosis, and TMP-SMX may be used for patients with beta-lactam intole

15 We characterized NNRTI and TMP-SMX effects on Plasmodium liver stages in vivo using

16 -effects and poor adherence by patients, and TMP-SMX alone is recommended in Australia.

17 grams/ml for resistance for both species and TMP-SMX MIC breakpoints of < or = 2.0-38 micrograms/ml f

18 ase inhibitor nevirapine, and the antibiotic TMP-SMX were assessed for activity against Plasmodium fa

19 lts, we conducted in vitro studies assessing TMP-SMX effects on the rodent parasites P. yoelii and Pl

20 were sequenced, and the relationship between TMP-SMX or dapsone use and gene mutations was analyzed.

21 ere 1.0 to 4.0 micrograms/ml and the current TMP-SMX MIC range was confirmed.

22 ed, placebo-controlled trial comparing daily TMP-SMX plus monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP)

23 the daily TMP-SMX plus DP arm and the daily TMP-SMX alone arm (6.1% vs. 3.1%; relative risk, 1.96; 9

24 acental malarial infection between the daily TMP-SMX plus DP arm and the daily TMP-SMX alone arm (6.1

25 dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) to daily TMP-SMX alone in HIV-infected pregnant women in an area

26 g of insecticide, adding monthly DP to daily TMP-SMX did not reduce the risk of placental or maternal

27 peated exposures to malaria parasites during TMP-SMX administration induces stage-specific and long-l

28 Emerging CC1292 expressed TMP-SMX resistance and decreased susceptibility to penic

29 integrons harboring resistance cassettes for TMP-SMX (dfr) was examined.

30 atient setting, identifying risk factors for TMP-SMX resistance and knowing the prevalence of TMP-SMX

31 The current limits for TMP-SMX were confirmed.

32 duces clinical episodes of malaria; however, TMP-SMX effect on Plasmodium liver stages requires furth

33 nd is likely responsible for the increase in TMP-SMX resistance.

34 Resistance to at least TMP-SMX and ampicillin was present in 25% of isolate, an

35 We wished to determine if the acquisition of TMP-SMX resistance by CgA occurred before or after the C

36 alth clinic and analyzed for determinants of TMP-SMX resistance.

37 aimed at determining the optimum duration of TMP-SMX prophylaxis in HIV-infected or HIV-exposed child

38 potential anti-infection immunity effect of TMP-SMX prophylaxis.

39 We compared the efficacy and side-effects of TMP-SMX with TMP-SMX plus doxycycline for the oral phase

40 are commonly prescribed, but the efficacy of TMP-SMX has been questioned.

41 effects of this practice on the emergence of TMP-SMX-resistant bacteria.

42 SMX resistance and knowing the prevalence of TMP-SMX resistance in the local community are important

43 esistance to ceftazidime, and limited use of TMP-SMX.

44 incision and drainage alone, clindamycin or TMP-SMX in conjunction with incision and drainage improv

45 ved oral clindamycin 300 mg 4 times daily or TMP-SMX 320 mg/1600 mg twice daily, each for 7 days.

46 patients to receive TMP-SMX plus placebo or TMP-SMX plus doxycycline for 20 weeks (1:1; block size o

47 Among children prescribed TMP-SMX prophylaxis, there were no significant differenc

48 Among children not prescribed TMP-SMX prophylaxis, 4443 treatments for malaria were gi

49 A rapid increase in the use of prophylactic TMP-SMX in HIV disease was also observed during this tim

50 ce, we randomly assigned patients to receive TMP-SMX plus placebo or TMP-SMX plus doxycycline for 20

51 One participant who received TMP-SMX had a hypersensitivity reaction.

52 ria after DP treatment in children receiving TMP-SMX prophylaxis.

53 However, for children receiving TMP-SMX, associations were strong and evident for all sa

54 In children not receiving TMP-SMX, low piperaquine concentrations were only modest

55 rim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) and rifampin, TMP-SMX alone, rifampin alone, or tetracycline alone.

56 l evidence is trimethoprim-sulfamethoxaxole (TMP-SMX) plus doxycycline.

57 omycin (23%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) (9%), and cefuroxime (7%).

58 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) and fluoroquinolones were active against 94% an

59 Daily trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) and insecticide-treated nets remain the main in

60 included oral trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) and rifampin, TMP-SMX alone, rifampin alone, or

61 indamycin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) are commonly prescribed, but the efficacy of TM

62 lindamycin or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) for 10 days.

63 ors (PIs) and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) have known activity against parasites during li

64 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) is widely used for Pneumocystis carinii pneumon

65 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) is widely used in malaria-endemic areas in huma

66 nd prescribed trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) prophylaxis.

67 ose receiving trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) prophylaxis.

68 f this trial, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) was incorporated for Pneumocystis carinii (PCP)

69 402 (36%) to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), 355 (32%) to sulfamethoxazole-sulfisoxazole, 3

70 usceptible to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), and all isolates were clindamycin susceptible.

71 em, rifampin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), and vancomycin.

72 clindamycin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), or placebo for 10 days.

73 resistance to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), the current drug of choice for treatment of ac

74 Additionally, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), used for opportunistic infection prophylaxis i

75 TI) caused by trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX)-resistant Escherichia coli is increasing and va

76 h as Bactrim (trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole; TMP-SMX) continue to play an important role in treating

77 terruption, and 5 patients were still taking TMP-SMX.

78 Despite the known effects that TMP-SMX has in reducing clinical malaria, its impact on

79 nt malaria models, we previously showed that TMP-SMX, at prophylactic doses, can arrest liver stage d

80 ent of malaria parasites and speculated that TMP-SMX prophylaxis during repeated malaria exposures wo

81 Our findings suggest that TMP-SMX is not inferior to TMP-SMX plus doxycycline for

82 clindamycin group was similar to that in the TMP-SMX group (221 of 266 participants [83.1%] and 215 o

83 ndamycin group (15 of 221, 6.8%) than in the TMP-SMX group (29 of 215 [13.5%], P=0.03) or the placebo

84 (264 in the clindamycin group and 260 in the TMP-SMX group), including 155 children (29.6%).

85 5% in the clindamycin group and 88.2% in the TMP-SMX group; difference, -1.2 percentage points; 95% C

86 3% in the clindamycin group and 77.7% in the TMP-SMX group; difference, -2.6 percentage points; 95% c

87 n the TMP-SMX plus placebo group than in the TMP-SMX plus doxycycline group (122 [39%] vs 167 [53%]).

88 us placebo group and 21 patients (7%) in the TMP-SMX plus doxycycline group developed culture-confirm

89 16 patients (5%) in the TMP-SMX plus placebo group and 21 patients (7%) in the T

90 verse drug reactions were less common in the TMP-SMX plus placebo group than in the TMP-SMX plus doxy

91 d and randomly assigned 626 patients: 311 to TMP-SMX plus placebo and 315 to TMP-SMX plus doxycycline

92 ents: 311 to TMP-SMX plus placebo and 315 to TMP-SMX plus doxycycline.

93 ings suggest that TMP-SMX is not inferior to TMP-SMX plus doxycycline for the oral phase of melioidos

94 erial cross-sectional study of resistance to TMP-SMX among all clinical isolates of Staphylococcus au

95 tion of Shigella isolates with resistance to TMP-SMX was 40% among white persons, 58% among Hispanic

96 llege community was found to be resistant to TMP-SMX.

97 when the infecting pathogen is resistant to TMP-SMX.

98 ct liver stage Plasmodium parasites, whereas TMP-SMX prevents patent parasitemia.

99 ons, we currently recommend prophylaxis with TMP-SMX and advise deletion of corticosteroids for patie

100 he efficacy and side-effects of TMP-SMX with TMP-SMX plus doxycycline for the oral phase of melioidos

101 th clindamycin (58 of 265 [21.9%]) than with TMP-SMX (29 of 261 [11.1%]) or placebo (32 of 255 [12.5%

102 Nine patients were treated with TMP-SMX and rifampin.

103 lower clinical cure rates when treated with TMP-SMX for an infection that is resistant to the drug.

104 men with uncomplicated cystitis treated with TMP-SMX when the infecting pathogen is resistant to TMP-

105 e relapsed and was successfully treated with TMP-SMX.