1 The
antichlamydial activities of two of these INPs, INPs 034
2 ere chlamydicidal and induced MdM to express
antichlamydial activity and (ii) although polymorphonucl
3 the present study 25 INPs were screened for
antichlamydial activity at a concentration of 50 muM, an
4 Despite their potent
antichlamydial activity in vitro, neither heparin nor de
5 oniae is a target organism, antibiotics with
antichlamydial activity may be able to ameliorate plaque
6 that C. trachomatis Pgp3 can neutralize the
antichlamydial activity of human cathelicidin LL-37, a h
7 The
antichlamydial activity of INP0341 was retained when tes
8 In conclusion, the potent
antichlamydial activity of INPs is directly or indirectl
9 Antichlamydial activity resided principally in residues
10 cation of LpxC inhibitors as unique class of
antichlamydial agents.
11 onditioned medium from these macrophages was
antichlamydial and contained elevated levels of interleu
12 There was no staining with any of the 3
antichlamydial antibodies in formalin-fixed brain tissue
13 In vitro,
antichlamydial antibodies increased the rate of Th1 acti
14 in-fixed brain tissue, by use of 3 different
antichlamydial antibodies.
15 delayed-type hypersensitivity responses, but
antichlamydial antibody responses were unaffected.
16 n improving the developability profile of an
antichlamydial chemical class previously reported by our
17 acylhydrazides with the goal to uncouple the
antichlamydial effect from iron starvation.
18 ydial infection, which may contribute to the
antichlamydial effect of IL-17.
19 However, the role of NO as an
antichlamydial effector could not be clearly demonstrate
20 chelate iron, and it is possible that their
antichlamydial effects are caused by iron starvation.
21 response, including elevated titers of serum
antichlamydial IgG2a and IgG2b, not IgG1, and elevated l
22 that infection fails to elicit a protective
antichlamydial immune response.
23 esence did not correlate with evidence of an
antichlamydial immune response.
24 pes, leading to the generation of protective
antichlamydial immunity and making these mice a valuable
25 r mononuclear infiltrates, primarily mediate
antichlamydial immunity.
26 Because of the potent
antichlamydial immunizing properties of DC, we hypothesi
27 as holo-transferrin, was able to negate the
antichlamydial properties of the INPs.
28 Longer-term and larger studies of
antichlamydial therapy are indicated.
29 ng subjects who may potentially benefit from
antichlamydial therapy.
30 Despite considerable effort,
antichlamydial vaccines have proven to be elusive using