{"doi":"10.1128/aac.00206-13","title":"<i>In Vitro</i>\n            Activity of CEM-102 (Fusidic Acid) against Prevalent Clones and Resistant Phenotypes of Staphylococcus aureus","abstract":"<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title>\n          <jats:p>\n            Clinical development of CEM-102 (fusidic acid) has recently begun in the United States for chronic oral treatment of prosthetic joint infections. To support this development, the\n            <jats:italic>in vitro</jats:italic>\n            activity of fusidic acid against important\n            <jats:named-content xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" content-type=\"genus-species\" xlink:type=\"simple\">Staphylococcus aureus</jats:named-content>\n            clones and resistance phenotypes was determined. Against 51 such isolates, the modal fusidic acid MIC was 0.12 μg/ml (range, 0.06 to 0.25 μg/ml for 49 isolates). This level of\n            <jats:italic>in vitro</jats:italic>\n            fusidic acid activity underscores the potential clinical utility of this compound in the United States.\n          </jats:p>","journal":"Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy","year":2013,"id":674499,"datarank":0.38474240361923057,"base_score":2.5649493574615367,"endowment":2.5649493574615367,"self_citation_contribution":0.38474240361923057,"citation_network_contribution":0.0,"self_endowment_contribution":0.38474240361923057,"citer_contribution":0.0,"corpus_percentile":null,"corpus_rank":null,"citation_count":12,"citer_count":0,"citers_with_citation_signal":0,"citers_with_endowment":0,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"is_dataset":false,"is_dataset_confidence":null,"is_data_producer":false,"deposit_databanks":null,"is_oa":false,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"has_version_chain":false,"published_date":null,"fair_score":null,"fair_percentile":null,"algorithm_id":"datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6","ranking_scope":"data_only","authors":[{"id":1762289,"name":"J. Deane","orcid":null,"position":1,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1762290,"name":"C. M. Pillar","orcid":null,"position":2,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1762291,"name":"P. Fernandes","orcid":null,"position":3,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1762288,"name":"D. F. Sahm","orcid":null,"position":0,"is_corresponding":false}],"reference_count":0,"raw_metadata":{"has_enrichment":true,"resolved":true,"title":"<i>In Vitro</i>\n            Activity of CEM-102 (Fusidic Acid) against Prevalent Clones and Resistant Phenotypes of Staphylococcus aureus","abstract":"<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title>\n          <jats:p>\n            Clinical development of CEM-102 (fusidic acid) has recently begun in the United States for chronic oral treatment of prosthetic joint infections. To support this development, the\n            <jats:italic>in vitro</jats:italic>\n            activity of fusidic acid against important\n            <jats:named-content xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" content-type=\"genus-species\" xlink:type=\"simple\">Staphylococcus aureus</jats:named-content>\n            clones and resistance phenotypes was determined. Against 51 such isolates, the modal fusidic acid MIC was 0.12 μg/ml (range, 0.06 to 0.25 μg/ml for 49 isolates). This level of\n            <jats:italic>in vitro</jats:italic>\n            fusidic acid activity underscores the potential clinical utility of this compound in the United States.\n          </jats:p>","is_dataset_classified":null,"base_score":2.5649493574615367,"endowment":2.5649493574615367,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"views":0,"has_version_chain":false,"is_dataset":false,"is_oa":false,"pmid":"23774441","pmcid":"PMC3754304","openalex_id":"https://openalex.org/W2043387864","authors":[],"funders":[],"total_grants":0,"fwci":0.693,"citation_percentile":0.69661675,"influential_citations":0,"citation_trend":[{"year":2014,"count":1},{"year":2015,"count":1},{"year":2016,"count":2},{"year":2018,"count":1},{"year":2019,"count":1},{"year":2020,"count":2},{"year":2021,"count":3},{"year":2023,"count":1}],"oa_status":"bronze","license":"https://journals.asm.org/non-commercial-tdm-license","oa_locations":[{"url":"https://aac.asm.org/content/aac/57/9/4535.full.pdf","host_type":"journal"},{"url":"https://aac.asm.org/content/aac/57/9/4535.full.pdf","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://journals.asm.org/doi/pdf/10.1128/AAC.00206-13","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.00206-13","host_type":"journal"},{"url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23774441","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3754304","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3754304","host_type":"repository"}],"fields_of_study":["Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus","Antifungal resistance and susceptibility","Orthopedic Infections and Treatments"],"mesh_terms":["Anti-Bacterial Agents","Culture Media","Fusidic Acid","Microbial Sensitivity Tests","Phenotype","Staphylococcus aureus","Drug Resistance, Bacterial"],"keywords":["Fusidic acid","Staphylococcus aureus","Microbiology","In vitro","Staphylococcal infections","Antibiotics","Biology","Micrococcaceae","Bacteria","Antibacterial agent","Biochemistry","Genetics"],"sdg_mappings":[{"sdg_number":0,"sdg_label":"Good health and well-being"}],"linked_datasets":[],"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"database_accessions":[],"source":"live","citation_network_status":"fetched"},"created_at":"2026-08-16T17:04:33.182790Z","pmid":null,"pmcid":null,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"oa_status":null,"license":null,"views":0,"total_file_size_bytes":0,"version_count":0,"fair_f":null,"fair_a":null,"fair_i":null,"fair_r":null,"fair_zscore":null,"fair_rationale":null,"fair_model":null,"fair_agent_version":null,"fair_fulltext_source":null,"fair_has_llm":null,"fair_computed_at":null,"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"db_accessions":[],"linked_datasets":[],"topics":[]}