Skip to main content
. 2012 Jun;56(6):3250–3260. doi: 10.1128/AAC.06082-11

Table 2.

In vitro interaction between ASA and AMB as determined by the nonparametric methoda

Drug combination (MIC) and strain FICI
ΔE model (%)
Mean (range) Interpretation Mean (range) ΣSyn (n) ΣAnt (n) Interpretation
F/MIC-1 (MIC80)
    CCA10 1.000 (0.750-1.000) Ind 0.9 (−0.4-2.6) 119 (11) –74 (9) Ind
    YEM30 0.625 (0.563-0.750) Ind 2.3 (1.2-3.4) 162 (15) –16 (3) Syn (M)
    ATCC 22019 0.500 (0.375-0.500) Syn 4.5 (2.8-6.3) 276 (15) –8 (1) Syn (S)
BF/MIC-2 (MIC50)
    CCA10 0.125 (0.125-0.188) Syn 15.3 (12.8-17.8) 1,225 (51) 0 (0) Syn (SS)
    YEM30 0.250 (0.188-0.313) Syn 10.8 (6.5-15.1) 927 (21) 0 (0) Syn (SS)
    ATCC 22019 0.156 (0.156-0.1888) Syn 10.8 (6.6-14.9) 918 (22) 0 (0) Syn (SS)
a

F, planktonic cells; BF, biofilm cells; Syn, synergism; Ant, antagonism; Ind, indifference; (M), moderate synergism; (S), strong synergism; (SS), super strong synergism. For the FICI model, synergy was defined as a FICI of <0.5, antagonism was defined as a FICI of >4.0, and indifference was defined as a FICI of >0.5 to 4 (i.e., no interaction). For the ΔE model, ΣSyn and ΣAnt were the sums of the percentages of all statistically significant synergistic and antagonistic interactions. Interactions with 100% statistically significant interactions were considered weak synergism, those with 100 to 200% were considered moderate, and those with >200% were considered strong.