{"doi":"10.1159/000221938","title":"Relationships between in vitro Susceptibility and Efficacy in Experimental Mouse Infection-Protection Assay of Cefazolin and Cephalothin using Escherichia coli Strains","abstract":"<jats:p>The disc sensitivity and minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of cefazolin and cephalothin were compared against a series of Escherichia coli isolates. These data were correlated with the mouse protective doses of the 2 cephalosporins in animals infected with E. coli strains selected according to their various degrees of in vitro sensitivity to the 2 cephalosporins. The overwhelming majority of E. coli strains showed a significantly higher degree of susceptibility and lower MIC values for cefazolin than for cephalothin. There has been found a good correlation between the inhibition zones and especially the MIC values and the ED&lt;sub&gt;50&lt;/sub&gt; results for both cephalosporins. Using E. coli clinical isolates, cefazolin was found to be superior to cephalothin not only in vitro experiments but also more potent in protecting the experimentally infected mice.</jats:p>","journal":"Chemotherapy","year":2009,"id":649198,"datarank":0.20794415416798362,"base_score":1.3862943611198906,"endowment":1.3862943611198906,"self_citation_contribution":0.20794415416798362,"citation_network_contribution":0.0,"self_endowment_contribution":0.20794415416798362,"citer_contribution":0.0,"corpus_percentile":null,"corpus_rank":null,"citation_count":3,"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":1692285,"name":"Paul Actor","orcid":null,"position":1,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692286,"name":"Lillian Phillips","orcid":null,"position":2,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692288,"name":"Joseph R. Guarini","orcid":null,"position":3,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692289,"name":"Jerry A. Weisbach","orcid":null,"position":4,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1692283,"name":"Joseph V. Uri","orcid":null,"position":0,"is_corresponding":false}],"reference_count":0,"raw_metadata":{"has_enrichment":true,"resolved":true,"title":"Relationships between in vitro Susceptibility and Efficacy in Experimental Mouse Infection-Protection Assay of Cefazolin and Cephalothin using Escherichia coli Strains","abstract":"<jats:p>The disc sensitivity and minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of cefazolin and cephalothin were compared against a series of Escherichia coli isolates. These data were correlated with the mouse protective doses of the 2 cephalosporins in animals infected with E. coli strains selected according to their various degrees of in vitro sensitivity to the 2 cephalosporins. The overwhelming majority of E. coli strains showed a significantly higher degree of susceptibility and lower MIC values for cefazolin than for cephalothin. There has been found a good correlation between the inhibition zones and especially the MIC values and the ED&lt;sub&gt;50&lt;/sub&gt; results for both cephalosporins. Using E. coli clinical isolates, cefazolin was found to be superior to cephalothin not only in vitro experiments but also more potent in protecting the experimentally infected mice.</jats:p>","is_dataset_classified":null,"base_score":1.3862943611198906,"endowment":1.3862943611198906,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"views":0,"has_version_chain":false,"is_dataset":false,"is_oa":false,"pmid":"780071","pmcid":null,"openalex_id":"https://openalex.org/W1981284053","authors":[],"funders":[],"total_grants":0,"fwci":0.0,"citation_percentile":0.09586433,"influential_citations":0,"citation_trend":[],"oa_status":"closed","license":"https://karger.com/pages/terms-and-conditions","oa_locations":[{"url":"https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/221938","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://karger.com/article-pdf/doi/10.1159/000221938","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000221938","host_type":"journal"},{"url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/780071","host_type":"repository"}],"fields_of_study":["Antibiotics Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy","Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria","Phenothiazines and Benzothiazines Synthesis and Activities"],"mesh_terms":["Animals","Cefazolin","Cephalosporins","Cephalothin","Dose-Response Relationship, Drug","Drug Resistance, Microbial","Escherichia coli","Escherichia coli Infections","Male","Microbial Sensitivity Tests","Mice"],"keywords":["Cefazolin","Cephalosporin","Escherichia coli","Microbiology","Minimum inhibitory concentration","In vitro","ED50","Biology","Enterobacteriaceae","Staphylococcus aureus","Bacteria","Antibiotics","Biochemistry"],"sdg_mappings":[],"linked_datasets":[],"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"database_accessions":[],"source":"live","citation_network_status":"fetched"},"created_at":"2026-08-10T03:22:30.951891Z","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":[]}