The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fosfomycin: evaluation of the published evidence on the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in Gram-negative pathogens
Open accessAbstract
Fosfomycin has attracted renewed interest for the treatment of lower urinary tract and even systemic infections caused by Gram-negative pathogens with resistance to traditionally used agents. The main concern regarding the clinical utility of fosfomycin refers to the potential for the emergence of resistance during therapy. In this review, we evaluate the available published evidence regarding the mechanisms and the frequency of in vitro mutational resistance to fosfomycin in Gram-negative pathogens. We also review data regarding the emergence of resistance in clinical studies of fosfomycin therapy in various infectious syndromes and data from studies that evaluate the evolution of fosfomycin resistance over time. There appears to be discordance between the high frequency of mutational resistance to fosfomycin in vitro and the lower extent of this phenomenon in clinical studies. This discordance could at least partly be attributed to a biological cost associated with common mutations that confer resistance to fosfomycin, including decreased growth rate and low adherence to epithelial cells for the resistant mutants. The development of resistance appears to be more frequent both in vitro and in clinical studies for Pseudomonas aeruginosa in comparison with Escherichia coli, whereas relevant data for other Enterobacteriaceae are relatively scarce. The urinary tract seems to provide a favourable environment for the use of fosfomycin with a low associated likelihood for the emergence of resistance, owing to high drug concentrations and acidic pH. Additional data are needed to further clarify the optimal use of fosfomycin for different infectious syndromes caused by contemporary multidrug-resistant pathogens.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fauvart, M., De Groote, V. N., & Michiels, J. (2011) · Journal of Medical Microbiology · doi:10.1099/jmm.0.030932-0 · Cited by 425
Cited by
Molecular mechanisms of membrane targeting antibiotics
Epand, R. M., Walker, C., Epand, R. F., & Magarvey, N. A. (2016) · Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Biomembranes · doi:10.1016/j.bbamem.2015.10.018 · Cited by 666
Hawkey, P. M., Warren, R. E., Livermore, D. M., McNulty, C. A. M., Enoch, D. A., Otter, J. A., & Wilson, A. P. R. (2018) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dky027 · Cited by 334
Fosfomycin: Mechanism and Resistance
Silver, L. L. (2017) · Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine · doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a025262 · Cited by 320
Satlin, M. J., Jenkins, S. G., & Walsh, T. J. (2014) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/ciu052 · Cited by 255
The Gram-negative permeability barrier: tipping the balance of the in and the out
Maher, C., & Hassan, K. A. (2023) · mBio · doi:10.1128/mbio.01205-23 · Cited by 194
Metadata
- Authors
- Karageorgopoulos, D. E., Wang, R., Yu, X.-H., & Falagas, M. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-11-16
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 255-268
- ISSN
- 0305-7453 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2091
- OpenAlex
- W2123373935
- Cited by
- 228
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fosfomycin: evaluation of the published evidence on the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in Gram-negative pathogens. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jac/dkr466
- The paper
- Karageorgopoulos, D. E., Wang, R., Yu, X.-H., & Falagas, M. E. (2012). Fosfomycin: evaluation of the published evidence on the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in Gram-negative pathogens. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkr466
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.