ライフサイエンスコーパス: rifampin

1 s of S. aureus in infected mice treated with rifampin.

2 sistance of a poxvirus to the antiviral drug rifampin.

3 sis resistant to at least both isoniazid and rifampin.

4 nt in the presence of the assembly inhibitor rifampin.

5 e negative pharmacokinetic interactions with rifampin.

6 tween PDE-Is (cilostazol and sildenafil) and rifampin.

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

8 esistant mutants were not cross-resistant to rifampin.

9 and absence of the RNA polymerase inhibitor rifampin.

10 d maybe also a potential benefit from adding rifampin.

11 One patient was taking only rifampin.

12 trifugation, was hindered in the presence of rifampin.

13 as 95.1% concordance with INH and 96.1% with rifampin.

14 e CarD protein did not affect sensitivity to rifampin.

15 m, gentamicin, tigecycline, doxycycline, and rifampin.

16 os instead of azithromycin, doxycycline, and rifampin.

17 und 26 is also shown to work in synergy with rifampin.

18 g beta-lactams, and 37% of patients received rifampin.

19 ine than in subjects receiving standard-dose rifampin.

20 gher rates of hepatotoxicity than placebo or rifampin.

21 starved cells but killed those generated by rifampin.

22 r 11 drugs: isoniazid (0.03 to 0.12 mug/ml), rifampin (0.03 to 0.25 mug/ml), ethambutol (0.25 to 2 mu

23 as monotherapy (0.48) or in combination with rifampin (0.34).

24 of removable components (0.60), early use of rifampin (0.98 per day of treatment within the first 30

25 After a single intravenous dose of rifampin (1 mg/kg), a 1.7-fold increase in plasma area u

26 09 if initially susceptible to isoniazid and rifampin, 1 in 113 if initially isoniazid resistant, and

27 assigned rifapentine 10, 15, or 20 mg/kg or rifampin 10 mg/kg daily for 8 weeks (intensive phase), w

28 e randomized to rifapentine 10 mg/kg/dose or rifampin 10 mg/kg/dose, administered 5 days per week for

29 ing the MDR-TB assay were 100% and 92.3% for rifampin, 100% and 93.8% for isoniazid, 91.6% and 94.4%

30 ) were initially prescribed isoniazid (73%), rifampin (12.7%), or another regimen (14.3%).

31 ntensified regimen that included higher-dose rifampin (15 mg per kilogram per day) and levofloxacin (

32 ental groups with 15 patients each receiving rifampin 20, 25, 30, and 35 mg/kg, respectively, for 14

33 oniazid (6H), three months of isoniazid plus rifampin (3RH) and three months of isoniazid plus rifape

34 plus isoniazid (900 mg) weekly for 12 weeks, rifampin (600 mg) plus isoniazid (900 mg) twice weekly f

35 Further, we show that rifampin (75 or 100 mg/kg b.i.d. for 3 d, intraperitonea

36 ic ineligibility were similar across groups (rifampin, 8.2%; rifapentine 10, 15, or 20 mg/kg, 3.4, 2.

37 results were 94.3% for isoniazid, 98.7% for rifampin, 97.6% for quinolones (ofloxacin, levofloxacin,

38 0)Z and HR(160)Z therapy regimens showed for rifampin a C(max) of 16.2 and 157.3 mg/L, an AUC(0-24h)

39 Rifampin, a semisynthetic rifamycin, is the cornerstone

40 ear dose-effect correlation was observed for rifampin after 3-week single-drug treatment.

41 azole (TMP-SMX) and rifampin, TMP-SMX alone, rifampin alone, or tetracycline alone.

42 ect testing of MTBDRplus on sputa was 4% for rifampin and 2% for isoniazid.

43 Empirical therapy of intravenous daptomycin, rifampin and ceftriaxone was initiated.

44 Serogroup and MIC to penicillin, rifampin and chloramphenicol were determined.

45 y contributed to the detection of phenotypic rifampin and fluoroquinolone resistance with negligible

46 Using catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin and implementing infection control precautions.

47 in primary human hepatocytes was induced by rifampin and inhibited by CYP3A4-specific inhibitors.

48 Low rifampin and isoniazid peak and AUC concentrations prece

49 y for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex and rifampin and isoniazid resistance detection on clinical

50 ve genotypic susceptibility results for both rifampin and isoniazid were seen in 26% of MTBDRplus tes

51 ntensive phase and was continued, along with rifampin and isoniazid, during the continuation phase.

52 zinamide, and ethambutol followed by 4 mo of rifampin and isoniazid, with a 4-mo clofazimine-containi

53 treatments are anchored by two antibiotics, rifampin and isoniazid.

54 DST for rifampin and kanamycin from sputum samples yielded resul

55 or uvrD increased spontaneous resistance to rifampin and nalidixic acid, and MMC/uvrD double mutants

56 ly bactericidal (isoniazid) and sterilizing (rifampin and pyrazinamide), and ethambutol to help preve

57 had concentration-dependent antagonism with rifampin and pyrazinamide, with an adjusted odds ratio f

58 tor of hPXR expression and the hPXR agonists rifampin and rilpivirine are chemical suppressors of miR

59 nt of hPXR target gene (CYP3A4) induction by rifampin and rilpivirine.

60 Three months of isoniazid plus rifampin and six-months of isoniazid are similarly cost-

61 increases the sensitivity of mycobacteria to rifampin and streptomycin.

62 acts had isolates resistant to isoniazid and rifampin, and 41 (36.6%) contacts had isolates with resu

63 three-times-weekly therapy with a macrolide, rifampin, and ethambutol is a reasonable initial treatme

64 hat included clarithromycin or azithromycin, rifampin, and ethambutol.

65 Safety, pharmacokinetics of rifampin, and fall in bacterial load were assessed.

66 folP1, rpoB, and gyrA, targets for dapsone, rifampin, and fluoroquinolones, real-time PCR-HRM assays

67 Use of vancomycin, penicillin, rifampin, and linezolid was associated with a higher haz

68 cin, trimethoprim, gentamicin, fusidic acid, rifampin, and mupirocin) performed by the routine clinic

69 , concurrent use of amiodarone, fluconazole, rifampin, and phenytoin compared with the use of NOACs a

70 Concurrent use of amiodarone, fluconazole, rifampin, and phenytoin with NOACs had a significant inc

71 high between-child variability of isoniazid, rifampin, and pyrazinamide concentrations: 110 (77%) com

72 tal pharmacokinetic parameters of isoniazid, rifampin, and pyrazinamide were identified for each pati

73 gimens to the standard regimen of isoniazid, rifampin, and pyrazinamide, based on exponential decline

74 an the standard 3-drug regimen of isoniazid, rifampin, and pyrazinamide.

75 tomycin, linezolid, minocyline, tigecycline, rifampin, and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole.

76 izing effect, with inoculum spiked with 0.5% rifampin- and isoniazid-resistant isogenic strains in so

77 erestingly, the antibiotics thiostrepton and rifampin are fast acting and might target additional pro

78 Catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin are proven to decrease the rates of central lin

79 rved with the combination of polymyxin B and rifampin as well as with polymyxin B and doxycycline, re

80 The dosage of 10 mg/kg/d rifampin, as currently used in the treatment of tubercul

81 Rifampin at a dose of 10 mg/kg was introduced in 1971 ba

82 ncentration-time curve (AUC) </= 363 mg.h/L, rifampin AUC </= 13 mg.h/L, and isoniazid AUC </= 52 mg.

83 Rifampin-based combinations exhibited an independent pro

84 for a median of 93 days, with similar use of rifampin-based combinations in MSSA- and MRSA-PJI.

85 of culture-positive TB patients receiving a rifampin-based regimen for 1 month.

86 quinolones and in those receiving a standard rifampin-based regimen in an interleukin-2 (IL-2) trial.

87 region, an 81-base pair region encoding the rifampin binding site on the beta subunit of RNA polymer

88 Herein, we show that rifampin binds to myeloid differentiation protein 2 (MD-

89 Rifampin blocked TLR4 signaling induced by LPS, includin

90 en the virus was passaged in the presence of rifampin but was lost in the absence of the drug, sugges

91 sceptible to chloramphenicol, penicillin and rifampin, but almost 60% of isolates characterized in So

92 levofloxacin, ethambutol, azithromycin, and rifampin (CLEAR) regimen or a comparative placebo regime

93 armacodynamic relationships of verapamil and rifampin coadministration in mice.

94 SA and MRSA prognoses, although the specific rifampin combinations may have had different efficacies.

95 weeks, followed by 18 weeks of isoniazid and rifampin (control group).

96 ange in antigen production when treated with rifampin, demonstrating drug susceptibility and resistan

97 Rifampin did not reduce the efavirenz Cmin.

98 97]); 65.66 for NOAC use alone vs 103.14 for rifampin (difference, 36.90 [99% CI, 1.59-72.22); and 56

99 Determination of optimal rifampin dosage in mice, resulting in maximum therapeuti

100 ur findings indicate that the currently used rifampin dosage in the therapy of TB is too low.

101 In our murine TB model a rifampin dosage of 80 mg/kg/d enabled a significant redu

102 ation might be achievable using an increased rifampin dose.

103 These results suggest that rifampin, doxycycline, and tigecycline may be useful add

104 required to compensate for concurrent use of rifampin during TB treatment.

105 robial activity and safety of rifapentine vs rifampin during the first 8 weeks of pulmonary tuberculo

106 ortion susceptibility results for isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol, streptomycin, amikacin, kanamycin,

107 rs should ideally evaluate for resistance to rifampin, fluoroquinolones, isoniazid, and pyrazinamide

108 ultured isolates phenotypically resistant to rifampin, fluoroquinolones, or aminoglycosides, but for

109 ents receiving the standard dose of 10 mg/kg rifampin, followed by consecutive experimental groups wi

110 ed risk differences (RD) from RCTs comparing rifampin for >/=9 months and 6 months.

111 erythromycin, clarithromycin, azithromycin, rifampin, gentamicin, and doxycycline against 101 isolat

112 media occurred in 110 of 169 (65.1%) in the rifampin group and 133 of 196 (67.9%) in the rifapentine

113 ed in 145 of 174 participants (83.3%) in the rifampin group and 171 of 198 participants (86.4%) in th

114 erapy, 40 of 254 participants (15.7%) in the rifampin group and 40 of 275 participants (14.5%) in the

115 ere negative in 81.3% of participants in the rifampin group versus 92.5% (P = 0.097), 89.4% (P = 0.29

116 Liquid cultures were negative in 56.3% (rifampin group) versus 74.6% (P = 0.042), 69.7% (P = 0.1

117 Compared with the rifampin group, the proportion negative at the end of in

118 Clinically, rifampin has been found to possess immunomodulatory effe

119 Rifampin has been used for the treatment of bacterial in

120 Change in resistance to tetracycline and rifampin in clinically relevant staphylococcal isolates

121 ed critical concentrations for isoniazid and rifampin in commercial broth-based systems.

122 indicate that MD-2 is a important target of rifampin in its inhibition of innate immune function and

123 We assessed dose-dependent activity of rifampin in single-drug treatment during 3 weeks.

124 lococci clinical isolates to tetracycline or rifampin in the intensive care unit and on a hospitalwid

125 staphylococcal isolates to tetracycline and rifampin in the intensive care unit or throughout the ho

126 Maximum tolerated dosage of rifampin in the murine TB was 160 mg/kg/d.

127 bacterial survival rates in the presence of rifampin in vitro, while deletion significantly decrease

128 te mechanism for resistance of poxviruses to rifampin, indicates a direct relationship between A17 le

129 Trimethoprim-SMX with rifampin is an efficient treatment, and prolonging treat

130 onsible for the immunosuppressive effects of rifampin is not known.

131 ciated with species typing and resistance to rifampin, isoniazid and fluoroquinolone antibiotics.

132 inamide, and clofazimine followed by 2 mo of rifampin, isoniazid, and clofazimine.

133 among M. tuberculosis isolates resistant to rifampin, isoniazid, and fluoroquinolones, respectively.

134 mine M. tuberculosis genotypic resistance to rifampin, isoniazid, and fluoroquinolones.

135 s from the Philippines for susceptibility to rifampin, isoniazid, and ofloxacin by using the conventi

136 and 100% for the detection of resistance to rifampin, isoniazid, and ofloxacin, respectively.

137 own to retain their anti-TB activity against rifampin, isoniazid, and streptomycin resistant Mtb stra

138 ith resistance to four types of antibiotics (rifampin, isoniazid, fluoroquinolones, and aminoglycosid

139 lofazimine-containing regimen: 2 mo of daily rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and clofazimine follo

140 egimen for TB treatment, i.e., 2 mo of daily rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol follow

141 iazid group, 2.9 per 100 person-years in the rifampin-isoniazid group, and 2.7 per 100 person-years i

142 Five genes-rpoB (rifampin), katG (isoniazid), pncA (pyrazinamide), gyrA (

143 The results also suggest that rifampin may be repositioned as an agent for the treatme

144 The use of rifampin may have contributed to homogenizing MSSA and M

145 ociation with higher levels of resistance to rifampin (MIC, >or=100 microg/ml).

146 , rpoB mutant progeny strains with confirmed rifampin monoresistance following antitubercular therapy

147 ese isolates, with their known resistance to rifampin, NGS of pncA improved PZA resistance detection

148 (SNPs) that confer resistance to isoniazid, rifampin, ofloxacin, and moxifloxacin occur the most fre

149 r-positive specimens resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, or both according to the GenoType MTBDRplus as

150 erythromycin or clarithromycin; dronedarone; rifampin; or phenytoin.

151 tration-time curve <11.95 mg/L x hour and/or rifampin peak <3.10 mg/L were the best predictors of the

152 azinamide peak concentration <38.10 mg/L and rifampin peak concentration <3.01 mg/L.

153 uberculosis regimen (which included 10 mg of rifampin per kilogram of body weight per day) with an in

154 imulations have suggested that isoniazid and rifampin pharmacokinetic variability best explained poor

155 Groups received 1) doxycycline and rifampin plus placebo instead of azithromycin; 2) azithr

156 instead of azithromycin; 2) azithromycin and rifampin plus placebo instead of doxycycline; or 3) plac

157 Rifapentine was more potent than rifampin prior to development of human-like pathology an

158 ulosis were treated with regimens containing rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol +/- a FQ for a me

159 One group of patients received isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol for 8 weeks, foll

160 and bactericidal effect rates for isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol were the same in

161 Therapeutic efficacy of a range of rifampin (R) dosages added to a regimen of isoniazid (H)

162 for MAC identification; 97.4% and 98.7% for rifampin(r) TB identification; 60.6% and 100% for isonia

163 resistance screening of rifampin-resistant (rifampin(r)), isoniazid(r), and pyrazinamide(r) TB.

164 ce for hepatoxicity comparing isoniazid with rifampin ranged from 3% to 7%, with a pooled RR of 3.29

165 ot significantly more active than a standard rifampin regimen, by the surrogate endpoint of culture s

166 This case report illustrates that rifampin represents an effective alternative to doxycycl

167 graphy (MMR), and sputum PCR with probes for rifampin resistance (Xpert MTB/RIF).

168 CI], 82.4% to 97.9%) sensitive for detecting rifampin resistance and 99.7% (95% CI, 98.3% to 99.9%) s

169 A selection cassette encoding rifampin resistance and a fluorescent marker was inserte

170 ts suggested that Rv2629 could be a cause of rifampin resistance and a valuable target for rifampin r

171 f M. tuberculosis The specific links between rifampin resistance and named lipid factors provide diag

172 pxB grown as a biofilm showed no increase in rifampin resistance compared to the same cells grown pla

173 ted for samples referred for confirmation of rifampin resistance detected by the Cepheid Xpert MTB/RI

174 ifampin resistance and a valuable target for rifampin resistance detection assays.

175 up to 8 h without affecting specificity for rifampin resistance detection.

176 largely determined by mutations in an 80-bp rifampin resistance determining region (RRDR) of the rpo

177 berculosis DNA and mutations associated with rifampin resistance in 5 of 7 participants with rifampin

178 iation was found between the 191C allele and rifampin resistance in an analysis that included the SCG

179 Rifampin resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis is lar

180 The Xpert assay failed to detect rifampin resistance in vitro when <90% of the organisms

181 Here we describe a second pathway to rifampin resistance involving A17, a membrane protein th

182 Tests of 23 different commonly occurring rifampin resistance mutations demonstrated that all 23 (

183 d in both genetic backgrounds, we found that rifampin resistance mutations lead to altered concentrat

184 Most rifampin resistance occurs through the acquisition of mi

185 support CDC recommendations to confirm Xpert rifampin resistance results.

186 lecular beacon assay should greatly simplify rifampin resistance testing in clinical laboratories.

187 performance of the Xpert assay for detecting rifampin resistance using phenotypic drug sensitivity te

188 Specificity for rifampin resistance was 99.5% and NPV was 98.9%.

189 sensitivity of the Xpert assay for detecting rifampin resistance was assessed in vitro by testing cul

190 Rifampin resistance was detected by the Xpert assay in 5

191 Rifampin resistance was excluded in 54/55 (98.2%) suscep

192 The sensitivity and specificity for rifampin resistance were 100% and 100%, respectively, an

193 this assay's sensitivity and specificity for rifampin resistance were 85.7% (95% CI, 57.2, 98.2) and

194 DR-Plus, the sensitivity and specificity for rifampin resistance were 91.7% and 96.6%, respectively,

195 increased false-negative rate for detecting rifampin resistance with mixed MTBC infections.

196 fers ofloxacin resistance) and rpoB (confers rifampin resistance) had significantly more breakpoints

197 the acquisition of missense mutations in the rifampin resistance-determining region, an 81-base pair

198 the wild-type virus was sufficient to confer rifampin resistance.

199 to simultaneously detect M. tuberculosis and rifampin resistance.

200 lture-positive cases and 9/9 (100%) cases of rifampin resistance.

201 M. smegmatis did not produce an increase in rifampin resistance.

202 smegmatis produced an eightfold increase in rifampin resistance.

203 osis as well asrpoBmutations associated with rifampin resistance.

204 ified 222/225 rifampin-resistant isolates as rifampin resistant (sensitivity, 98.7%; 95% CI, 95.8 to

205 ed that all 23 (100%) would be identified as rifampin resistant.

206 hen <90% of the organisms in the sample were rifampin resistant.

207 Consequently, we found that the frequency of rifampin-resistant (Rif(r)) mutants is dramatically incr

208 tiate between DNA sequences of wild-type and rifampin-resistant (Rif(r)) Mycobacterium tuberculosis (

209 equencing-based drug resistance screening of rifampin-resistant (rifampin(r)), isoniazid(r), and pyra

210 Phylogenetically related rifampin-resistant actinomycetes with mutations mapping

211 629 A191C mutations were present in 99.1% of rifampin-resistant and 0% of rifampin-susceptible clinic

212 The 191C allele was present in 30/98 (30.6%) rifampin-resistant isolates and 25/148 (16.9%) rifampin-

213 The assay identified 222/225 rifampin-resistant isolates as rifampin resistant (sensi

214 Five rifampin-resistant isolates have been isolated in Urugua

215 In several rifampin-resistant isolates, Ion Torrent sequencing reve

216 vitro-derived recombinants of ofloxacin- and rifampin-resistant L(1) and D strains, respectively, gro

217 rium leprae and 1 of these patients also had rifampin-resistant M. leprae.

218 unctive transferrin reduced the emergence of rifampin-resistant mutants of S. aureus in infected mice

219 posure yielded considerably lower numbers of rifampin-resistant mutants than cultures of the wild typ

220 mately 10,000 cell wall lipids in a panel of rifampin-resistant mutants within two genetically distin

221 ng a principal screening tool for diagnosing rifampin-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (M

222 to their superior affinity for wild-type and rifampin-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis RNA polyme

223 Surprisingly, isoniazid- and rifampin-resistant populations did not achieve >/=1% pro

224 to DD Mtb generation, an effect lacking in a rifampin-resistant strain with a mutation in rpoB, which

225 acteristic remodeling of cell wall lipids in rifampin-resistant strains of M. tuberculosis The specif

226 This unique, rifampin-resistant transcriptional machinery is conserve

227 Until now, all known rifampin-resistant vaccinia virus isolates have containe

228 After one round of selection, a rifampin-resistant virus that contained a genomic duplic

229 ampin resistance in 5 of 7 participants with rifampin-resistant, culture-positive tuberculosis.

230 sis (wild type) to those of their respective rifampin-resistant, rpoB mutant progeny strains with con

231 iepileptic drugs and the antimicrobial agent rifampin, resulting in drug-induced osteomalacia, which

232 henotypic DST (true resistance) was 100% for rifampin (RIF) (14/14), 90.0% for isoniazid (INH) (36/40

233 of a highly conserved regulatory motif, the rifampin (RIF) -associated element (RAE), which is found

234 promoter were targeted for the detection of rifampin (RIF) and isoniazid (INH) resistance, respectiv

235 n version 1 [V1]) for the rapid detection of rifampin (RIF) and isoniazid (INH) resistance.

236 hat is resistant to both isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF) is spreading.

237 MTB/RIF for detection of M. tuberculosis and rifampin (RIF) resistance in sputum.

238 that detects Mycobacterium tuberculosis and rifampin (RIF) resistance in under 2 h.

239 on of the rpoB gene that are associated with rifampin (RIF) resistance.

240 Rifampin (RIF) upregulates CYP 450 isoenzymes, potential

241 Streptomycin (STR), isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RIF), ethambutol (EMB) (collectively known as

242 ires daily administration of combinations of rifampin (RIF), isoniazid [isonicotinylhydrazine (INH)],

243 eptibility testing (DST) to isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RIF), moxifloxacin (MOX), ofloxacin (OFX), ami

244 merase (rpoB) gene that confer resistance to rifampin (RIF), the treatment of choice for tuberculosis

245 ere offered 9-month isoniazid (INH), 4-month rifampin (RIF), weekly rifapentine/isoniazid (RPT/INH) f

246 significantly associated with patients with rifampin (RIF)-resistant TB.

247 rget of the first-line antituberculosis drug rifampin (Rif).

248 NAP inhibitor and current antibacterial drug rifampin (Rif).

249 etting up direct DST for isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF).

250 t infection (PJI), often in combination with rifampin (RIF).

251 Nigerian HIV-infected individuals (7.0% for rifampin [RIF] and 9.3% for RIF or isoniazid [INH]).

252 ex (MTBC)-negative, MTBC-positive (including rifampin [RIF] susceptible and RIF resistant), and nontu

253 orrelation with high levels of resistance to rifampin (rifampicin) in Mycobacterium tuberculosis isol

254 After isoniazid and rifampin (rifampicin), the next pivotal drug class in My

255 %) were about twice as high as resistance to rifampin (RMP) (6.3%) and ethambutol (EMB) (6.0%).

256 mance of GeneChip in detecting resistance to rifampin (RMP) and isoniazid (INH) and in detecting mult

257 (MTBC) are defined by resistance to at least rifampin (RMP) and isoniazid (INH).

258 ined their activity against isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RMP), and streptomycin (SM) resistant Mtb stra

259 s used in the United States-isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RMP), ethambutol (EMB), and pyrazinamide (PZA)

260 Since 1967, Rifampin (RMP, a Rifamycin) has been used as a first lin

261 resistance to isoniazid (katG and inhA) and rifampin (rpoB).

262 Rifampin's inhibition of TLR4 signaling was also observe

263 treatment of healthy volunteers (n = 6) with rifampin selectively induced CYP3A4-dependent 4beta,25(O

264 gatifloxacin-containing regimen for treating rifampin-sensitive pulmonary tuberculosis.

265 s 18 to 65 years of age with smear-positive, rifampin-sensitive, newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculos

266 tion curves and peak serum concentrations of rifampin showed a more than proportional increase with d

267 Catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin significantly decreased the incidence of centra

268 22/429 (98%) accurate results for isoniazid, rifampin, streptomycin, ethambutol, amikacin, kanamycin,

269 and 335/336 rifampin-susceptible isolates as rifampin susceptible (specificity, 99.7%; 95% CI, 95.8 t

270 ent in 99.1% of rifampin-resistant and 0% of rifampin-susceptible clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis

271 fampin-resistant isolates and 25/148 (16.9%) rifampin-susceptible isolates and was more common in iso

272 y, 98.7%; 95% CI, 95.8 to 99.6%) and 335/336 rifampin-susceptible isolates as rifampin susceptible (s

273 Xpert MTB/RIF-confirmed rifampin-susceptible tuberculosis cases were recruited a

274 utation in rpoB, which encodes the canonical rifampin target, the beta subunit of RNA polymerase.

275 transcriptional and translational inhibitors rifampin, tetracycline, and erythromycin were found to b

276 xycycline, linezolid, meropenem, penicillin, rifampin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, a

277 Like rifampin, the squaramides preferentially inhibited synth

278 nfer a survival advantage in the presence of rifampin, they may alter the normal process of transcrip

279 , nitrofurantoin, quinupristin-dalfopristin, rifampin, tigecycline, and vancomycin.

280 trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) and rifampin, TMP-SMX alone, rifampin alone, or tetracycline

281 mice exhibit tolerance to both isoniazid and rifampin to a degree proportional to the activation stat

282 Addition of adjunctive rifampin to other antibiotics may improve cure rates.

283 inhibitor of NQO1 dicoumarol synergized with rifampin to promote intracellular killing of mycobacteri

284 le effect on the level of persisters seen in rifampin-treated mice.

285 Risk of relapse was lowered with rifampin treatment for >/=9 months compared with 6 month

286 tion that could also improve the efficacy of rifampin treatment of tuberculosis.

287 r step by repression of A14 expression or by rifampin treatment, A11 colocalized with virion membrane

288 Two weeks of rifampin up to 35 mg/kg was safe and well tolerated.

289 (adjusted OR, 5.65; 95% CI, 0.93-34.47), and rifampin use (adjusted OR, 4.56; 95% CI, 0.74-27) were a

290 etween catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin use and a decrease in central line-associated b

291 nsplantation, cytomegalovirus infection, and rifampin use) when compared with none of these factors c

292 seven different antibiotics (ciprofloxacin, rifampin, vancomycin, ampicillin, sulfamethoxazole, gent

293 vity during the first 28 days of therapy and rifampin was active against dormant bacilli after the es

294 Resistance to rifampin was linked to a partial duplication of the gene

295 a substrate for CYP3A4, which is induced by rifampin, we evaluated the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynam

296 ns of amikacin, doripenem, levofloxacin, and rifampin were quantitatively assessed using a validated

297 , 9200 catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin were used hospitalwide over a total of 511,520

298 ect of catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin with and without other infection control precau

299 -month course of intermittent rifapentine or rifampin with isoniazid nor continuous isoniazid was sup

300 here was a nonlinear increase in exposure to rifampin without an apparent ceiling effect and a greate