Could the Adoptive Transfer of Memory Lymphocytes be an Alternative Treatment for Acinetobacter baumannii Infections?
Rattachement africain : es. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
We evaluated the efficacy of the adoptive transfer of memory B, CD4+, and CD8+ T lymphocytes compared with sulbactam and tigecycline in an experimental murine pneumonia model by two multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii strains, colistin-susceptible AbCS01 and colistin-resistant AbCR17. Pharmacodynamically optimized antimicrobial dosages were administered for 72 h, and intravenous administration of 2 × 106 of each of the memory cells in a single dose 30 min post-infection. Bacterial lung and blood counts and mortality rates were analyzed. Results showed that a single dose of memory B or CD4+ T cells was as effective as sulbactam in terms of bacterial clearance from the lungs and blood compared with the untreated mice or the tigecycline-treated mice inoculated with the AbCS01 strain. In the pneumonia model by AbCR17, a single dose of memory B or CD4+ T cells also reduced the bacterial load in the lungs compared with both antibiotic groups and was more efficacious than tigecycline in terms of blood clearance. Regarding survival, the adoptive transfer of memory B or CD4+ T cells was as effective as three days of sulbactam treatment for both strains. These data suggest that adoptive memory cell transfer could be a new effective treatment of multidrug-resistant A. baumannii infections.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Could the Adoptive Transfer of Memory Lymphocytes be an Alternative Treatment for Acinetobacter baumannii Infections?
- Date Crossref
- 30/09/2024
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.