Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Epidemiology and Surveillance

Five-Year Longitudinal Assessment (2008 to 2012) of E-101 Solution Activity against Clinical Target and Antimicrobial-Resistant Pathogens

Gerald A. Denys, Chris M. Pillar, Daniel F. Sahm, Peter O'Hanley, Jackson T. Stephens Jr.
Gerald A. Denys
aIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chris M. Pillar
bEurofins Medinet, Chantilly, Virginia, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel F. Sahm
bEurofins Medinet, Chantilly, Virginia, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter O'Hanley
cExoxemis, Inc., Little Rock, Arkansas, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jackson T. Stephens Jr.
cExoxemis, Inc., Little Rock, Arkansas, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.03020-14
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

This study summarizes the topical E-101 solution susceptibility testing results for 760 Gram-positive and Gram-negative target pathogens collected from 75 U.S. sites between 2008 and 2012 and 103 ESKAPE pathogens. E-101 solution maintained potent activity against all bacterial species studied for each year tested, with MICs ranging from <0.008 to 0.25 μg porcine myeloperoxidase (pMPO)/ml. These results confirm that E-101 solution retains its potent broad-spectrum activity against U.S. clinical isolates and organisms with challenging resistance phenotypes.

TEXT

E-101 solution is a novel antimicrobial agent with broad-spectrum activity against both Gram-negative and Gram-positive pathogens, including drug-resistant strains. E-101 solution is an enzyme-based topical formulation composed of glucose oxidase (GO) and porcine myeloperoxidase (pMPO) in an aqueous vehicle. Topical application of E-101 solution with glucose activates in situ GO production of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) that drives pMPO-dependent oxidation of chloride to hypochlorous acid (HOCl). The reaction of H2O2 with HOCl yields singlet molecular oxygen (1O2). The microbicidal action of E-101 solution involves the binding of pMPO to the surfaces of target microorganisms, where HOCl and 1O2 effect direct oxidative damage to the microorganisms (1–6).

E-101 solution represents the first-in-class topical myeloperoxidase-based microbicidal formulation applied directly to surgical wounds to prevent surgical-site infections (SSI). It is currently being tested in a pivotal phase 3 clinical trial (i.e., the Triple-IN Study) for the prevention of SSI after colorectal surgery. Infections caused by antimicrobial-resistant pathogens have become common and are increasingly difficult to treat (7). As part of the clinical development of E-101 solution, it is important to monitor any changes in activity that may indicate the emergence of resistance. This study reports the in vitro susceptibility results of E-101 solution against target SSI pathogens isolated from relevant clinical specimens from patients seeking medical care in the United States over a 5-year period (2008 to 2012). In addition, we evaluated the activity of E-101 solution against highly resistant ESKAPE (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter species) pathogens and other current problem pathogens with emerging resistance (8, 9).

A total of 760 nonduplicate, nonconsecutive clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, enterococci, Enterobacteriaceae (Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus mirabilis, and Enterobacter cloacae), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa collected from 75 sites across the 9 U.S. census regions were evaluated (Table 1). Among the isolates tested were those with multidrug-resistant (MDR) phenotypes. A total of 103 nonduplicate clinical isolates of ESKAPE pathogens were preselected based on resistance phenotype and genetic characterization from both the Eurofins Medinet and NARSA repositories (Table 2). Evaluated ESKAPE pathogens included the following: S. aureus, including 10 hospital-acquired methicillin-resistant S. aureus (HA-MRSA) isolates (1 USA600 and 9 USA100 clones), 10 community-acquired MRSA isolates (CA-MRSA) (10 USA300 clones), 7 daptomycin-nonsusceptible S. aureus isolates, 9 linezolid-resistant S. aureus isolates, and 8 vancomycin-nonsusceptible S. aureus isolates (3 vancomycin-resistant S. aureus [VRSA] and 5 vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus [VISA] isolates); Enterococcus spp., including 9 vancomycin-resistant (5 E. faecalis and 4 E. faecium) isolates; Enterobacteriaceae, including 10 extended-spectrum-β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing isolates (5 E. coli and 5 K. pneumoniae isolates), 10 carbapenemase-producing K. pneumoniae (KPC) isolates, and 10 derepressed AmpC cephalosporinase-producing isolates (5 Citrobacter spp. and 5 Enterobacter spp.); and 20 MDR isolates, including 10 Acinetobacter baumannii and 10 P. aeruginosa isolates. ESBLs were phenotypically defined on prior testing as a >2-fold reduction in ceftazidime/cefotaxime MIC when combined with clavulanic acid (10). KPC-2 and KPC-3 carbapenemases were confirmed by real-time PCR (11). Derepressed AmpC cephalosporinase was phenotypically defined on prior testing as resistant to cefoxitin, ceftazidime, and cefotaxime, not inhibited by clavulanic acid, and susceptible to carbapenems (12). MDR bacteria were classified based on prior testing and on recommended guidelines (13). MDR bacteria were defined as nonsusceptible to ≥1 antimicrobial agents in ≥3 antimicrobial classes.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Activity of E-101 solution against target bacterial pathogensa

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Activity profile of E-101 solution against evaluated ESKAPE pathogensa

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using a modified broth microdilution method based on CLSI M7 guidelines as previously described (14, 15). Modifications to CLSI M7 were made to accommodate the rapid in vitro activity of E-101 solution. In the modified method, the first E-101 enzyme solution containing pMPO was diluted in double-strength cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth (CAMHB), resulting in doubling dilutions throughout the microdilution panel. Next, a standardized bacterial suspension, prepared in double-strength glucose substrate solution, was added to each well and mixed with enzyme dilutions. Each antimicrobial agent and enzyme solution was diluted in CAMHB and dispensed in microdilution panels. Isolates were prepared by suspending several colonies from an overnight culture on Trypticase soy agar with 5% sheep blood in sterile saline, and the density was adjusted to a turbidity equivalent to that of a 0.5 McFarland standard (∼108 CFU/ml). Standardized bacterial suspensions were further diluted in double-strength glucose substrate solution and mixed with serial drug dilutions to achieve a final concentration of 5 × 105 CFU/ml. E-101 solution begins to generate reactive oxygen species immediately postinoculation, The microdilution panels were incubated in ambient air at 35°C for 18 to 24 h. MICs were determined by observing the lowest concentration of antimicrobial agent that inhibited growth of the organisms and was expressed as μg pMPO/ml in E-101 solution. Quality control ranges determined for E-101 solution for S. aureus ATCC 29213 and E. coli ATCC 25922 were 0.01 to 0.03 μg pMPO/ml and 0.15 to 0.5 μg pMPO/ml, respectively (14). Isolates were concurrently tested against relevant comparators in accordance with CLSI M7 (13). Quality control organisms included S. aureus ATCC 29213, E. faecalis ATCC 29212, E. coli ATCC 25922, and P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853.

Table 1 summarizes the MICs of E-101 solution for each year tested. Based on MIC50s and MIC90s, E-101 solution maintained a high level of activity (± one doubling dilution). From 2008 to 2012, we observed no increase in the MIC distribution of isolates tested. The E-101 solution MIC ranges for the staphylococci maintained the highest level of potency (≤0.008 to 0.03 μg pMPO/ml). The distribution of MICs was very similar for all phenotypes tested. The E-101 solution MIC ranges for E. faecalis and E. faecium were very similar during each test period. E-101 solution was consistently more active against E. faecium (MIC50, 0.06 μg pMPO/ml, and MIC90, 0.12 μg pMPO/ml) than E. faecalis (MIC50 and MIC90, 0.25 μg pMPO/ml). The E-101 solution MIC50s and MIC90s obtained for each species among the Enterobacteriaceae also reflected a high level of potency of E-101 solution that has been maintained against most recent organisms. Multidrug resistance among Enterobacteriaceae evaluated had no impact on E-101 solution activity. The E-101 solution MIC50s and MIC90s for P. aeruginosa also showed a high level of potency of E-101 solution that has been maintained against most recent organisms, including MDR strains.

The activity of E-101 solution against resistant ESKAPE pathogens was equivalent to that observed for E-101 solution during recent surveillance testing, where isolates with these phenotypes were infrequent or not encountered (Table 2). E-101 solution maintained potent MICs (0.015 μg pMPO/ml or less excluding one daptomycin-nonsusceptible isolate) overall against S. aureus isolates, including those resistant to current agents against Gram-positive organisms. E-101 solution was active against prevalent HA-MRSA and CA-MRSA clones. Among the enterococci, E-101 solution maintained potency against vancomycin-resistant enterococci, with MICs in the 0.03- to 0.12-μg pMPO/ml range. E-101 solution MICs were 2-fold lower against vancomycin-resistant E. faecium (0.03 to 0.06 μg pMPO/ml) than vancomycin-resistant E. faecalis (0.06 to 0.12 μg pMPO/ml). Against various species and types of β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae, E-101 solution maintained potent MICs, including the recently emerged KPC-producing K. pneumoniae. Against A. baumannii, including all evaluated MDR A. baumannii isolates, E-101solution had MICs of 0.03 μg pMPO/ml. E-101 solution was also highly active against MDR P. aeruginosa, with an MIC50 of 0.03 μg pMPO/ml and an MIC90 of 0.06 μg pMPO/ml.

Prevention of SSIs remains an important medical need in high-risk surgical patient populations, such as colorectal surgery patients, transplant patients, and patients receiving implant devices. Improvement in infection control practices and topical antiseptics that are tissue safe and broadly microbicidal for any potential pathogen for wound management are needed. Topical antiseptics currently on the market are associated with local tissue injury and impairment of wound healing when applied directly to clean or infected wounds. E-101 solution is intended for direct application to wounds and wound margins without associated tissue injury. Previous studies using the partial full-thickness pig wound model have shown that topical application of E-101 solution to surgical wounds does not impair subsequent wound healing (16). Furthermore, E-101 solution has demonstrated in vivo efficacy in whole-animal models of surgical infection prevention (17, 18).

Across in vitro studies to date, E-101 solution has demonstrated greater overall in vitro activity than gentamicin and mupirocin against both Gram-negative and Gram-positive pathogens (14). Data from this surveillance study confirm earlier studies and demonstrate that E-101 solution had high in vitro potency and a broad spectrum of activity against many circulating isolates in the United States during 2008 and 2012. In addition, E-101 solution was potent in vitro against ESKAPE pathogens, which constitute clinically important pathogens with problematic mechanisms of resistance to commonly utilized agents. The emergence and spread of resistance combined with the increasing prevalence of multidrug resistance among ESKAPE pathogens have left relatively few effective therapeutic options for the treatment of drug-resistant infections. This attribute highlights the important utility of E-101 solution as a prophylactic agent for the prevention of SSIs, where resistant organisms are likely to be encountered, as well as other superficial infections caused by resistant organisms.

In summary, the MIC results of this longitudinal 5-year surveillance study indicate that E-101 continues to maintain a high level of activity against all target organism groups. No significant longitudinal changes in MICs further support the efficacy of E-101 solution, especially for preventing SSIs with organisms likely to be encountered clinically at present, including those with problematic resistance to other currently utilized agents. Continued monitoring of E-101 solution activity is warranted during clinical testing so that any changes in the level of activity can be detected in a timely matter.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We express appreciation to Dinesh Shah and Jennifer Deane for providing excellent support during this study.

This study was supported by Exoxemis, Inc., Little Rock, AR. Gerald A. Denys is a paid consultant for Exoxemis, Inc. Chris M. Pillar was an employee of Eurofins Medinet, Inc., and is currently employed by Micromyx, LLC, Kalamazoo, MI. Daniel F. Sahm was an employee of Eurofins Medinet, Inc., and is currently employed by International Health Management Associates, Inc., Schaumburg, IL. Eurofins Medinet, Inc. was paid by Exoxemis, Inc. for access to its bacterial strains and research facilities and equipment for this study. Peter O'Hanley serves as Executive Vice-President of Clinical Development and Regulatory Affairs of Exoxemis, Inc. Jackson T. Stephens, Jr., serves as President and CEO of Exoxemis, Inc.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 9 April 2014.
    • Returned for modification 21 April 2014.
    • Accepted 15 May 2014.
    • Accepted manuscript posted online 19 May 2014.
  • Copyright © 2014, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Allen RC,
    2. Stephens JT Jr
    . 2011. Myeloperoxidase selectively binds and selectively kills microbes. Infect. Immun. 79:474–485. doi:10.1128/IAI.00910-09.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Allen RC,
    2. Stephens JT Jr
    . 2011. Reduced-oxidized difference spectral analysis and chemiluminescence-based Scatchard analysis demonstrate selective binding of myeloperoxidase to microbes. Luminescence 26:208–213. doi:10.1002/bio.1210.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Britigan BE,
    2. Ratcliffe HR,
    3. Buettner GR,
    4. Rosen GM
    . 1996. Binding of myeloperoxidase to bacteria: effect on hydroxyl radical formation and susceptibility to oxidant-mediated killing. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1290:231–240. doi:10.1016/0304-4165(96)00014-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Kiryu C,
    2. Makiuchi M,
    3. Mitazaki J,
    4. Fujinaga T,
    5. Kakinuma K
    . 1999. Physiological production of singlet molecular oxygen in the myeloperoxidase-H2O2-chloride system. FEBS let. 443:154–158. doi:10.1016/S0014-5793(98)01700-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.↵
    1. Miyasaki KT,
    2. Zambon JJ,
    3. Jones CA,
    4. Wilson ME
    . 1987. Role of high-avidity binding of human neutrophil myeloperoxidase in the killing of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans. Infect. Immun. 55:1029–1036.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Selvaraj RJ,
    2. Zgliczynski JM,
    3. Paul BB,
    4. Sbarra AJ
    . 1978. Enhanced killing of myeloperoxidase-coated bacteria in the myeloperoxidase-H2O2-Cl system. J. Infect. Dis. 137:481–485. doi:10.1093/infdis/137.4.481.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    1. Boucher HW,
    2. Talbot GH,
    3. Bradley JS,
    4. Edwards JE,
    5. Gilbert D,
    6. Rice LB,
    7. Scheld M,
    8. Spellberg B,
    9. Bartlett J
    . 2009. Bad bugs, no drugs: no ESKAPE! An update from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 48:1–12. doi:10.1086/595011.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    1. Rice LB
    . 2008. Federal funding for the study of antimicrobial resistance in nosocomial pathogens: no ESKAPE. J. Infect. Dis. 197:1079–1081. doi:10.1086/533452.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    1. Pendleton JN,
    2. Gorman SP,
    3. Gilmore BF
    . 2013. Clinical relevance of the ESKAPE pathogens. Expert Rev. Anti Infect. Ther. 11:297–308. doi:10.1586/eri.13.12.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2013. M100-S23. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: 23rd informational supplement. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
  11. 11.↵
    1. Cole JM,
    2. Schuetz AN,
    3. Hill CE,
    4. Nolte FS
    . 2009. Development and evaluation of a real-time PCR assay for detection of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase genes. J. Clin. Microbiol. 47:322–326. doi:10.1128/JCM.01550-08.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Livermore DM,
    2. Brown DFJ
    . 2001. Detection of β-lactamase-mediated resistance. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 48:S59–64.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    1. Magiorakos AP,
    2. Srinivasan A,
    3. Carey RB,
    4. Carmeli Y,
    5. Falagas ME,
    6. Giske CG,
    7. Harbarth S,
    8. Hindler JF,
    9. Kahlmeter G,
    10. Olsson-Liljequist B,
    11. Paterson DL,
    12. Rice LB,
    13. Stelling Struelens JMJ,
    14. Vatopoulos A,
    15. Weber JT,
    16. Monnet DL
    . 2012. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 18:268–281. doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03570.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Denys GA,
    2. Grover P,
    3. O'Hanley P,
    4. Stephens JT Jr
    . 2011. In vitro antibacterial activity of E-101 solution, a novel myeloperoxidase-mediated antimicrobial, against gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 66:335–342. doi:10.1093/jac/dkq429.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2012. M07-A9. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically; approved standard: 9th ed. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
  16. 16.↵
    1. Sullivan TP,
    2. Eaglstein WH,
    3. Davis SC,
    4. Mertz P
    . 2001. The pig as a model for human wound healing. Wound Repair Regen. 9:66–67. doi:10.1046/j.1524-475x.2001.00066.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    1. Denys GA,
    2. Davis JC,
    3. O'Hanley PD,
    4. Stephens JT Jr
    . 2011. In vitro and in vivo activities of E-101 solution against Acinetobacter baumannii isolates from U.S. military personnel. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 55:3603–3608. doi:10.1128/AAC.01606-10.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Denys GA,
    2. Davis JC,
    3. O'Hanley PD,
    4. Stephens JT Jr
    . 2014. E-101 solution, a novel myeloperoxidase mediated topical antimicrobial demonstrates in vivo efficacy in whole animal models of surgical infection prevention. J. Antimicrob. Photon 129:278–287.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Five-Year Longitudinal Assessment (2008 to 2012) of E-101 Solution Activity against Clinical Target and Antimicrobial-Resistant Pathogens
Gerald A. Denys, Chris M. Pillar, Daniel F. Sahm, Peter O'Hanley, Jackson T. Stephens Jr.
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Jul 2014, 58 (8) 4911-4914; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.03020-14

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Five-Year Longitudinal Assessment (2008 to 2012) of E-101 Solution Activity against Clinical Target and Antimicrobial-Resistant Pathogens
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Five-Year Longitudinal Assessment (2008 to 2012) of E-101 Solution Activity against Clinical Target and Antimicrobial-Resistant Pathogens
Gerald A. Denys, Chris M. Pillar, Daniel F. Sahm, Peter O'Hanley, Jackson T. Stephens Jr.
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Jul 2014, 58 (8) 4911-4914; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.03020-14
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • TEXT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AAC
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • AAC Podcast
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AACJournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0066-4804; Online ISSN: 1098-6596