The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Erythromycin resistant propionibacteria in antibiotic treated acne patients: association with therapeutic failure
Abstract
Erythromycin resistant (EmR) propionibacteria were isolated from the skin surface of 51% of patients treated with oral erythromycin and 42% of patients treated with topical clindamycin compared with 3% of untreated control subjects (P less than 0.001). Amongst the topical clindamycin-treated patients, there was a higher incidence of EmR propionibacterial carriage in those patients who had previously been treated with oral erythromycin (64%) than in patients with no known previous exposure to erythromycin (20%; 0.01 greater than P greater than 0.001). Patients responding to oral erythromycin treatment carried EmR propionibacteria less frequently (24%) than patients who were not responding or who had relapsed (70%; P less than 0.001). These observations suggest that the use of oral erythromycin and/or topical clindamycin encourages the development of resistant propionibacteria and that the emergence of resistant strains is associated with therapeutic failure in erythromycin-treated patients. In total 63 resistant isolates were obtained from 52 subjects. There were 42 strains of Propionibacterium acnes, 16 strains of Propionibacterium granulosum and five strains of Propionibacterium avidum. The majority of isolates were inducibly or constitutively resistant to macrolide (e.g. erythromycin), lincosamide (e.g. clindamycin) and streptogramin B type antibiotics. Therefore, the isolates are phenotypically indistinguishable from the majority of EmR bacteria in which resistance is due to methylation of 23S ribosomal RNA.
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
Cited by
Bhate, K., & Williams, H. C. (2013) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/bjd.12149 · Cited by 890
Haider, A. (2004) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.292.6.726 · Cited by 273
James, W. D. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmcp033487 · Cited by 269
Ozolins, M., Eady, E. A., Avery, A. J., Cunliffe, W. J., Li Wan Po, A., O'Neill, C., Simpson, N. B., Walters, C. E., Carnegie, E., Lewis, J. B., et al. (2004) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(04)17591-0 · Cited by 168
Self-citationJooya, A., Siadat, A., Iraji, F., & Enshaieh, S. (2007) · Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology · doi:10.4103/0378-6323.30646 · Cited by 165
Metadata
- Authors
- EADY, E. A., COVE, J. H., HOLLAND, K. T., & CUNLIFFE, W. J.
- Venue
- British Journal of Dermatology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1989-07
- Volume
- 121
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 51-57
- ISSN
- 0007-0963 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2133
- OpenAlex
- W2112151566
- Cited by
- 279
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Erythromycin resistant propionibacteria in antibiotic treated acne patients: association with therapeutic failure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1989.tb01399.x
- The paper
- EADY, E. A., COVE, J. H., HOLLAND, K. T., & CUNLIFFE, W. J. (1989). Erythromycin resistant propionibacteria in antibiotic treated acne patients: association with therapeutic failure. British Journal of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1989.tb01399.x
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.