The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Photodynamic Effects of Novel XF Porphyrin Derivatives on Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic Cells
Open accessAbstract
The worldwide rise in the rates of antibiotic resistance of bacteria underlines the need for alternative antibacterial agents. A promising approach to the killing of gram-positive antibiotic-resistant bacteria of the skin uses light in combination with a photosensitizer to induce a phototoxic reaction. Different concentrations (0 to 100 μM) of porphyrin-based photosensitizers (CTP1, XF70, and XF73) and different incubation times (5 min, 1 h, and 4 h) were used to determine phototoxicity against two methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains, one methicillin-sensitive S. aureus strain, one methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis strain, one Escherichia coli strain, and human keratinocytes and fibroblasts. Incubation with 0.005 μM XF70 or XF73, followed by illumination, yielded a 3-log 10 (≥99.9%) decrease in the viable cell numbers of all staphylococcal strains, indicating that the XF drugs have high degrees of potency against gram-positive bacteria and also that the activities of these novel drugs are independent of the antibiotic resistance pattern of the staphylococci examined. CTP1 was less potent against the staphylococci under the same conditions. At 0.005 μM, XF70 and XF73 demonstrated no toxicity toward fibroblasts or keratinocytes. No inactivation of E. coli was detected at this concentration. XF73 was confirmed to act via a reactive oxygen species from the results of studies with sodium azide (a quencher of singlet oxygen), which reduced the killing of both eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells. When a quencher of superoxide anion and the hydroxyl radical was used, cell killing was not inhibited. These results demonstrate that the porphyrin-based photosensitizers had concentration-dependent differences in their efficacies of killing of methicillin-resistant staphylococcal strains via reactive oxygen species without harming eukaryotic cells at the same concentrations.
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
Definition of type I and type II photosensitized oxidation
Foote, C. S. (1991) · Photochemistry and Photobiology · doi:10.1111/j.1751-1097.1991.tb02071.x · Cited by 1,248
Cited by
Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy – what we know and what we don’t
Cieplik, F., Deng, D., Crielaard, W., Buchalla, W., Hellwig, E., Al-Ahmad, A., & Maisch, T. (2018) · Critical Reviews in Microbiology · doi:10.1080/1040841x.2018.1467876 · Cited by 902
Self-citationAmbient UVA‐Induced Expression of p53 and Apoptosis in Human Skin Melanoma A375 Cell Line by Quinine
Yadav, N., Dwivedi, A., Mujtaba, S. F., Kushwaha, H. N., Singh, S. K., & Ray, R. S. (2013) · Photochemistry and Photobiology · doi:10.1111/php.12047 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Maisch, T., Bosl, C., Szeimies, R.-M., Lehn, N., & Abels, C.
- Venue
- Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2005-04
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1542-1552
- ISSN
- 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-6596
- OpenAlex
- W1969155152
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Photodynamic Effects of Novel XF Porphyrin Derivatives on Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic Cells. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.49.4.1542-1552.2005
- The paper
- Maisch, T., Bosl, C., Szeimies, R.-M., Lehn, N., & Abels, C. (2005). Photodynamic Effects of Novel XF Porphyrin Derivatives on Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic Cells. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.49.4.1542-1552.2005
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.