C26H44O9
12650-69-0
Impetigo, Impetigo caused by Staphylococcus aureus, Impetigo caused by streptococcus pyogenes, Secondary infection Skin infection, Staphylococcus aurea colonization of the nasal passage
Mupirocin is a topical antibiotic with a unique structure and mechanism of action that has established it as a cornerstone therapy for superficial bacterial skin infections and a critical tool in public health infection control strategies. Derived from the fermentation of Pseudomonas fluorescens, Mupirocin is not a single chemical entity but a mixture of related pseudomonic acids, with pseudomonic acid A being the principal active component. Its defining pharmacological feature is the specific inhibition of bacterial isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase (IleRS), a mechanism distinct from all other major antibiotic classes. This distinction confers the significant clinical advantage of no inherent cross-resistance, allowing Mupirocin to remain effective against pathogens that have developed resistance to other antimicrobials, most notably methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
The clinical utility of Mupirocin is twofold. It is a first-line treatment for primary skin infections such as impetigo and folliculitis, as well as secondarily infected traumatic skin lesions, caused by susceptible strains of S. aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes. Beyond treating active infections, its role in public health has been profound, particularly through the use of a dedicated nasal formulation for the eradication of MRSA carriage. This application is central to infection control programs aimed at reducing transmission and preventing invasive infections in high-risk settings like hospitals and long-term care facilities.
The therapeutic value of Mupirocin is, however, shadowed by the growing global challenge of bacterial resistance. Two distinct mechanisms threaten its long-term efficacy. Low-level resistance (MuL), arising from chromosomal mutations, poses a potential risk to individual treatment success, particularly in the context of the drug's high protein binding in wound exudate. Of far greater concern is high-level resistance (MuH), which is mediated by the plasmid-borne mupA gene. The horizontal transfer of this plasmid, which often carries resistance determinants to other antibiotic classes, facilitates the rapid spread of multi-drug resistant organisms and is directly linked to the failure of MRSA decolonization efforts. The widespread use of Mupirocin, especially in institutional decolonization protocols, creates significant selective pressure that drives the proliferation of these resistant strains.
From a safety perspective, Mupirocin is exceptionally well-tolerated. Its pharmacokinetic profile is ideal for a topical agent, with minimal systemic absorption, rapid metabolism to an inactive metabolite (monic acid), and swift renal excretion. This profile results in a near-absence of systemic adverse effects and drug interactions. A key formulation-specific precaution relates to the polyethylene glycol (PEG) vehicle present in the ointment formulation, which can be absorbed from large, open wounds or burns and poses a risk of nephrotoxicity in patients with pre-existing moderate to severe renal impairment.
In conclusion, Mupirocin stands as a valuable and effective, yet increasingly vulnerable, therapeutic agent. Its unique mechanism and targeted clinical applications are indispensable in the current era of antimicrobial resistance. However, its continued utility is critically dependent on robust antimicrobial stewardship. Prudent, evidence-based use, coupled with diligent surveillance for resistance, is imperative to preserve the efficacy of this important antibiotic for the future.
A thorough understanding of Mupirocin's chemical nature is fundamental to appreciating its formulation, stability, and biological activity. It is a natural product with a complex structure, existing commercially as a defined mixture rather than a single pure compound.
Mupirocin is the established generic name for this antibiotic. Historically and in early scientific literature, it was referred to as pseudomonic acid, a name derived from its producing organism, Pseudomonas.[1] Specifically, the primary active component is pseudomonic acid A.[1] Over its development and commercial life, it has been associated with various synonyms and codes, including BRL 4910A, Bactoderm, and Turixin.[1]
Commercially, Mupirocin is most widely recognized by its brand names, which include Bactroban, Bactroban Nasal, and Centany.[1] To facilitate unambiguous identification across scientific and regulatory databases, a standardized set of identifiers is used, as detailed in Table 1.
Mupirocin is classified as a small molecule drug [User Query]. Its molecular formula is C26H44O9, corresponding to a molecular weight of approximately 500.62 g/mol.[1]
The formal IUPAC name for the principal component, pseudomonic acid A, is 9-oxiran-2-yl]methyl]oxan-2-yl]-3-methylbut-2-enoyl]oxynonanoic acid.[1] This complex name describes a unique structure: an alpha,beta-unsaturated ester resulting from the formal condensation of the carboxylic acid group of monic acid with the terminal hydroxyl group of 9-hydroxynonanoic acid.[9] The structure contains several stereogenic centers, a tetrahydropyran ring, and an epoxide ring, all of which are critical for its biological activity.
A crucial aspect of Mupirocin's chemical identity is that it is not a single, pure substance but a mixture of several structurally related pseudomonic acids produced biosynthetically.[4] The composition is dominated by pseudomonic acid A (PA-A), which constitutes over 90% of the mixture and is the primary source of its antibacterial activity.[2] Several minor, related acids are also present, including [9]:
This identity as a controlled, natural-product mixture, rather than a single synthetic molecule, has significant consequences for its production and quality control. The consistency of the mixture's profile, particularly the high percentage of the active PA-A component, is a critical quality attribute. Regulatory agencies monitor this closely, and failure to meet the specified assay for the active ingredient can lead to product recalls, as has been documented.[14] This underscores the importance of rigorous manufacturing standards to ensure consistent potency and efficacy from batch to batch, a challenge inherent to drugs derived from fermentation processes.
Mupirocin presents as a white to almost-white crystalline solid or powder.[8] Its key physicochemical properties are summarized in Table 1. The melting point is consistently reported in the range of 74–78 °C.[1] It has a high boiling point of 672.3°C at standard pressure.[1]
Mupirocin's solubility profile dictates its formulation for topical use. It is poorly soluble in water but demonstrates good solubility in various organic solvents, including dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), ethanol, and methanol.[1] This lipophilicity is consistent with its ability to be formulated in ointment and cream bases for effective delivery into the skin.
The compound requires careful handling and storage conditions. It is sensitive to heat, air, and moisture (hygroscopic) and should be stored under inert gas at refrigerated (2-8°C) or frozen (<0°C) temperatures to prevent degradation and ensure stability.[1]
Table 1: Chemical and Physical Properties of Mupirocin
Property | Value | Source(s) |
---|---|---|
DrugBank ID | DB00410 | 9 |
Type | Small Molecule | [User Query] |
CAS Number | 12650-69-0 | 1 |
Molecular Formula | C26H44O9 | 1 |
Molecular Weight | 500.62 g/mol | 1 |
IUPAC Name | 9-oxiran-2-yl]methyl]oxan-2-yl]-3-methylbut-2-enoyl]oxynonanoic acid | 1 |
Appearance | White to almost-white crystalline powder | 8 |
Melting Point | 77–78 °C | 8 |
Boiling Point | 672.3°C at 760 mmHg | 1 |
Solubility | Poorly soluble in water; Soluble in DMSO, Ethanol, Methanol | 1 |
Storage Conditions | Store at 2-8°C or <0°C; Air, heat, and moisture sensitive | 1 |
The history of Mupirocin is a compelling narrative of natural product discovery, intricate biosynthetic elucidation, and strategic clinical development that positioned it as a key agent in the fight against antimicrobial resistance.
Mupirocin's story begins in the laboratory with the isolation of a unique antibacterial substance from the Gram-negative soil bacterium Pseudomonas fluorescens, specifically strain NCIMB 10586.[1] The initial work, conducted in the early 1970s, led to the characterization of the primary active compound, named pseudomonic acid A, by a team led by A. T. Fuller in 1971.[2] The drug was subsequently developed and first brought to market by GlaxoSmithKline under the well-known trade name Bactroban.[2]
Mupirocin is a product of microbial fermentation, not chemical synthesis, and its production pathway is a showcase of enzymatic complexity.[8]
The blueprint for Mupirocin synthesis is encoded within a massive 74 kb gene cluster. This cluster directs the expression of six large, multi-domain enzymes and at least twenty-six other specialized peptides that work in concert.[9] The synthesis is carried out by a hybrid Type I and Type II polyketide synthase (PKS) system, a molecular assembly line that builds the complex carbon skeleton of the molecule. A particularly noteworthy feature is its atypical
trans-acyltransferase (AT) organization. In most Type I PKS systems, each module has its own integrated AT domain to load the next building block. In the Mupirocin pathway, however, this function is consolidated into a single, separate protein, MmpC, which contains the only two AT domains for the entire multi-protein complex. This trans-acting system services the other PKS proteins, MmpA and MmpD, which lack AT domains entirely.[9]
The final Mupirocin molecule is constructed via the esterification of two major precursors, each synthesized on its own dedicated enzymatic track [9]:
Once the main chains are assembled, the molecule undergoes a series of crucial "tailoring" steps, including the enzymatic formation of the tetrahydropyran ring and the epoxide group, which are mediated by specialized enzymes such as MupW and MupO.[9] The entire production process is tightly regulated within the bacterium by a quorum-sensing system, which uses signaling molecules to coordinate gene expression based on cell population density.[19]
Commercial-scale production of Mupirocin relies on a controlled submerged fermentation process using P. fluorescens.[16] The bacteria are cultured in a specialized nutrient-rich medium (e.g., SSM broth) under optimized conditions of temperature and aeration to maximize yield.[19] Following fermentation, the Mupirocin is extracted from the culture supernatant, typically using an organic solvent like ethyl acetate. The crude extract then undergoes extensive purification, primarily through techniques like high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), to isolate the final product with the required purity and composition.[19]
The regulatory journey of Mupirocin in the United States reveals a strategic, phased introduction of different formulations designed to meet evolving clinical needs. This timeline is not arbitrary but rather reflects the shifting landscape of infectious diseases, particularly the emergence and spread of MRSA as a major public health threat.
The initial FDA approval was granted on December 31, 1987, for Bactroban (mupirocin) 2% topical ointment.[20] This established its foundational role as a treatment for common superficial skin infections like impetigo.
A pivotal moment in its history came on September 18, 1995, with the approval of Bactroban Nasal (mupirocin calcium) 2% ointment.[20] This approval was a direct response to the growing crisis of hospital-acquired MRSA in the 1990s. The development of a formulation specifically for eradicating nasal carriage demonstrated a strategic shift in the drug's application from merely treating infections to preventing them in high-risk populations, solidifying its importance in infection control.
Subsequently, on December 11, 1997, the FDA approved Bactroban (mupirocin calcium) 2% cream.[20] This provided a valuable alternative to the oleaginous ointment base. The cream formulation is more cosmetically acceptable, especially for facial lesions, potentially improving patient adherence. Furthermore, it offered a formulation free of the polyethylene glycol (PEG) vehicle, an important clinical distinction for certain patient populations. While some sources incorrectly cite 1997 as the initial approval date for Mupirocin as a whole, this date specifically marks the introduction of the cream formulation.[17]
Following the expiration of patents, generic versions of Mupirocin have become available, with approvals for products like a generic Mupirocin Cream occurring on January 24, 2013.[24] The staggered approval history thus tells a story of a drug that evolved from a standard topical antibiotic to a critical tool in hospital epidemiology, and finally to a more refined set of therapeutic options for clinicians.
Table 2: FDA Approval History of Mupirocin Formulations
Formulation | Active Ingredient | Brand Name (Applicant) | Approval Date | Source(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Topical Ointment, 2% | Mupirocin | Bactroban (GlaxoSmithKline) | December 31, 1987 | 20 |
Nasal Ointment, 2% | Mupirocin Calcium | Bactroban (GlaxoSmithKline) | September 18, 1995 | 20 |
Topical Cream, 2% | Mupirocin Calcium | Bactroban (GlaxoSmithKline) | December 11, 1997 | 20 |
The pharmacological profile of Mupirocin is characterized by a potent, unique mechanism of local antibacterial action combined with a pharmacokinetic profile that ensures minimal systemic exposure, creating a highly effective and safe topical agent.
Mupirocin's antibacterial effect stems from a mechanism that is distinct among all other clinically utilized antibiotic classes. It functions as a potent, reversible, and highly specific inhibitor of bacterial isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase (IleRS).[1] This enzyme plays an indispensable role in the first step of protein synthesis: the charging of transfer RNA (tRNA) with the amino acid isoleucine.
By binding to IleRS, Mupirocin competitively blocks the formation of isoleucyl-tRNA.[3] This action leads to a rapid depletion of the charged tRNA pool within the bacterial cell, which in turn halts the incorporation of isoleucine into nascent polypeptide chains. The result is a complete arrest of bacterial protein and RNA synthesis, ultimately leading to cell death.[3] The affinity of Mupirocin for bacterial IleRS is substantially higher than for its mammalian counterpart, which accounts for its selective toxicity against bacteria.[16]
The nature of its activity—bacteriostatic or bactericidal—is concentration-dependent. At the lower concentrations corresponding to its minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), Mupirocin is primarily bacteriostatic, meaning it inhibits bacterial growth.[2] However, when applied topically as a 2% formulation (20,000 µg/g), it achieves exceptionally high local concentrations at the site of infection. At these levels, its effect becomes robustly bactericidal, capable of killing 90–99% of susceptible bacteria over a 24-hour period.[3] The minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) is typically 8 to 30 times higher than the MIC, a threshold easily surpassed by standard topical application.[3]
A paramount advantage of this unique mechanism is the absence of inherent cross-resistance with other antibiotic classes. Bacteria resistant to beta-lactams, macrolides, tetracyclines, aminoglycosides, or fluoroquinolones remain fully susceptible to Mupirocin, provided they have not acquired a specific Mupirocin resistance mechanism.[3] This makes it an invaluable agent for treating infections caused by multi-drug resistant organisms like MRSA.
The pharmacokinetic profile of Mupirocin is ideally suited for a topical agent, designed to maximize local activity while minimizing systemic effects. This favorable profile underpins its excellent safety record.
This combination of a unique local mechanism and a pharmacokinetic profile that prevents systemic exposure creates a powerful therapeutic synergy. The drug is highly potent where it is needed—on the skin—but is effectively absent systemically, which minimizes the risk of systemic side effects, drug interactions, and the development of resistance in commensal bacteria in other body sites like the gut.
However, a more nuanced analysis reveals how a subtle pharmacokinetic property can influence clinical outcomes. The high protein binding of Mupirocin (>97%) is a critical factor in the context of real-world infections.[3] While laboratory MICs are determined in protein-free media, wound exudate is rich in proteins. This means that at the actual site of infection, a significant fraction of the applied Mupirocin will be bound to proteins and thus rendered inactive. This effectively lowers the free, active drug concentration. While the 2% topical concentration is generally considered high enough to overcome even low-level resistance (MuL), the reduction in free drug due to protein binding may narrow this therapeutic margin. This phenomenon could explain documented cases of clinical failure even against strains classified with only low-level resistance, providing a crucial link between a pharmacokinetic property and the clinical relevance of a specific resistance mechanism.[26]
The clinical utility of Mupirocin is defined by its targeted spectrum of antimicrobial activity and the evolving challenge of bacterial resistance. It is a narrow-spectrum agent with potent activity against the key Gram-positive pathogens of skin and soft tissue.
Mupirocin's activity is primarily directed against aerobic Gram-positive cocci, with limited and selective action against some Gram-negative organisms.[15]
Mupirocin demonstrates excellent in vitro and clinical efficacy against the most common causative agents of superficial skin infections.[3]
Mupirocin's activity against Gram-negative bacteria is limited and species-specific.
Mupirocin has no clinically relevant activity against anaerobic bacteria, such as Bacteroides fragilis or Clostridium difficile (MICs ≥32 µg/mL), nor does it have activity against fungi like Candida albicans.[16]
Table 3: Detailed Antimicrobial Spectrum of Mupirocin with MIC Ranges
Organism | Mupirocin MIC (µg/mL) | Source(s) |
---|---|---|
Gram-Positive Aerobes | ||
Staphylococcus aureus (incl. MRSA) | ≤0.5 | 27 |
Staphylococcus epidermidis | ≤0.5 | 27 |
Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A) | 0.12 | 34 |
Streptococcus agalactiae (Group B) | 0.5 | 34 |
Streptococcus pneumoniae | 0.12 | 34 |
Listeria monocytogenes | 8.0 | 34 |
Enterococcus faecalis | 64 | 16 |
Clostridium difficile | 32 | 34 |
Gram-Negative Aerobes | ||
Haemophilus influenzae | 0.12 | 34 |
Neisseria gonorrhoeae | 0.05 | 34 |
Neisseria meningitidis | 0.05 | 34 |
Moraxella catarrhalis | 0.2 | 34 |
Escherichia coli | 128 | 34 |
Pseudomonas aeruginosa | ≥6,400 | 34 |
Bacteroides fragilis (Anaerobe) | >6,400 | 34 |
The emergence and spread of Mupirocin resistance is the single greatest threat to its continued clinical utility. Resistance rates are rising globally, with some surveillance studies reporting prevalence as high as 81% in certain settings, particularly among MRSA isolates.[3] Two primary mechanisms of resistance have been identified, and they pose distinct levels of clinical and public health challenges.
The distinction between these two resistance mechanisms is critical from a public health perspective. While MuL is a concern for the treatment of an individual patient, MuH is a driver of epidemic spread and a significant threat to infection control efforts. The mupA gene's location on a plasmid is of paramount concern because plasmids can be transferred horizontally between bacteria, not only within the same species (S. aureus to S. aureus) but also across different species and genera. This allows for the rapid dissemination of high-level resistance throughout a bacterial population, a process far faster than the selection of chromosomal mutations.
Furthermore, the plasmids carrying mupA are often conjugative and carry resistance determinants for multiple other classes of antibiotics, such as tetracycline and trimethoprim.[9] This means that the selective pressure exerted by the widespread use of Mupirocin can inadvertently co-select for bacteria that are resistant to a host of other important drugs, creating multi-drug resistant "superbugs".[35] High-level resistance is unequivocally associated with the failure of MRSA decolonization regimens, undermining a key strategy for preventing serious nosocomial infections.[36] The increasing prevalence of MuH, driven by Mupirocin use, thus poses a substantial threat to both individual patient care and broader public health.
Mupirocin's clinical use is centered on its topical application for treating superficial skin infections and for eradicating nasal colonization of S. aureus, particularly MRSA. Its applications are divided into FDA-approved indications and several common off-label uses.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Mupirocin for three primary indications, with specific formulations designated for each use.[38]
Mupirocin 2% ointment is indicated for the topical treatment of impetigo caused by susceptible strains of Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes.[7] Impetigo, whether bullous or non-bullous, is a common superficial skin infection, and while it can be self-limiting, antibiotic treatment is typically recommended to shorten the duration of symptoms, reduce transmission to others, and prevent complications.[38] For limited, non-extensive disease, topical therapy with Mupirocin is considered a first-line treatment and has been shown to be as effective as oral antibiotics like erythromycin, with a more favorable side effect profile.[33] Clinical trials have demonstrated high rates of clinical cure and pathogen eradication, often exceeding 90%.[3]
Mupirocin 2% cream is approved for the topical treatment of secondarily infected traumatic skin lesions, such as minor lacerations, sutured wounds, and abrasions (up to 10 cm in length or 100 cm2 in area).[7] These infections are also typically caused by
S. aureus and S. pyogenes. In this setting, Mupirocin provides targeted antibacterial therapy directly at the site of trauma, helping to prevent the progression to more serious infections like cellulitis. Clinical studies have shown that Mupirocin cream is as effective as oral cephalexin for these infections, again with the benefit of fewer systemic adverse effects.[41]
Mupirocin calcium 2% nasal ointment is specifically indicated for the eradication of nasal colonization with MRSA in adult patients and healthcare workers.[38] This indication is a cornerstone of infection control programs designed to reduce the risk of MRSA transmission and infection during institutional outbreaks.[33] The anterior nares are the primary reservoir for
S. aureus in the human body, and decolonizing this site in carriers can significantly decrease the risk of subsequent autoinfection (e.g., surgical site infections) and transmission to other vulnerable patients.[42] Completed Phase 3 clinical trials have confirmed the efficacy of Mupirocin for the prevention of recurrent MRSA skin infections through decolonization protocols.[44] However, one trial comparing Mupirocin to another agent for MRSA decolonization was withdrawn, indicating ongoing research in this area.[45]
In addition to its approved indications, Mupirocin is frequently used off-label for a variety of other dermatological conditions and infection control purposes.[38]
While these off-label uses are common, experts caution against the routine, indiscriminate use of Mupirocin for colonization eradication due to the significant risk of promoting resistance. A targeted strategy based on screening and risk assessment is generally preferred over widespread decolonization.[38]
Mupirocin is available for prescription use exclusively as a topical product, formulated at a 2% concentration in several different bases to suit various clinical applications.[46]
Mupirocin is commercially available in the United States in two primary dosage forms [7]:
The products are available under various brand names, including Bactroban and Centany, and also as generic formulations.[5] They are typically packaged in 15 g, 22 g, or 30 g tubes.[24]
Proper administration is crucial for efficacy and to minimize potential side effects. Mupirocin is for external use only and must not be ingested or used ophthalmically.[7]
Mupirocin has an excellent safety profile, characterized by high local tolerability and a near-absence of systemic toxicity, a direct result of its minimal percutaneous absorption. However, specific precautions, contraindications, and potential adverse effects must be considered.
Adverse reactions to topical Mupirocin are generally mild, localized to the site of application, and infrequent.[42]
The most frequently reported side effects are local skin reactions, occurring in a small percentage of patients [17]:
Systemic side effects are rare due to minimal absorption but have been reported occasionally, including headache and nausea.[7]
While rare, more serious adverse events can occur and warrant immediate medical attention.
The only absolute contraindication to Mupirocin is a known history of hypersensitivity or allergic reaction to Mupirocin or any of the components in the formulation.[17]
Due to its minimal systemic absorption when applied topically, Mupirocin has no known clinically significant drug-drug interactions.[17] Patients should still inform their healthcare provider of all medications they are taking, but the risk of interaction is extremely low.[56]
The use of Mupirocin in specific patient populations requires careful consideration of the available safety data, which varies by group. The excellent local tolerability and minimal systemic absorption profile generally make it a safe option, but certain caveats apply.
Mupirocin is classified as Australian TGA Pregnancy Category B1, while the US FDA has phased out its letter category system and has not assigned a new one.[57] The previous US FDA Pregnancy Category was B.[32]
The use of Mupirocin during breastfeeding is generally considered to be low risk, but specific precautions are advised.[30]
Mupirocin is widely used in children, but its safety and efficacy have been established only for specific age groups and formulations.[7]
Parents and caregivers should be instructed on proper application techniques, the importance of completing the full course of treatment, and measures to prevent the spread of infection, such as hand washing and keeping lesions covered.[64]
Mupirocin remains a uniquely valuable asset in the therapeutic armamentarium against bacterial infections. Its development from a natural product of Pseudomonas fluorescens into a targeted topical antibiotic represents a significant achievement in pharmaceutical science. The drug's distinct mechanism of action, the inhibition of bacterial isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase, provides a critical advantage by circumventing cross-resistance with other antibiotic families, thereby preserving its activity against challenging pathogens like MRSA. This, combined with an exemplary pharmacokinetic profile that maximizes local efficacy while virtually eliminating systemic exposure and its associated risks, establishes Mupirocin as a first-line agent for common superficial skin infections and a cornerstone of MRSA decolonization strategies.
However, the continued success of Mupirocin is profoundly threatened by the inexorable rise of antimicrobial resistance. The global proliferation of high-level, plasmid-mediated resistance (mupA) poses a direct challenge to its efficacy, particularly in the hospital and long-term care settings where it is used most intensively for infection control. The co-location of mupA with other resistance genes on mobile genetic elements means that the use of Mupirocin can inadvertently drive the selection and spread of multi-drug resistant organisms, a sobering reminder of the delicate ecological balance in antimicrobial therapy.
Therefore, the future of Mupirocin hinges on a collective commitment to antimicrobial stewardship. Its use must be guided by evidence, restricted to appropriate clinical indications, and supported by diligent surveillance for emerging resistance. For clinicians, this involves reserving Mupirocin for confirmed or highly suspected staphylococcal and streptococcal infections and implementing targeted, rather than indiscriminate, decolonization protocols. For public health bodies and researchers, the priority must be to monitor resistance trends closely and to explore novel strategies and alternative agents to mitigate the selective pressure on this vital drug. Preserving the efficacy of Mupirocin is not merely about maintaining one therapeutic option; it is about safeguarding a critical tool in the ongoing global battle against antimicrobial resistance.
Published at: August 6, 2025
This report is continuously updated as new research emerges.
Empowering clinical research with data-driven insights and AI-powered tools.
© 2025 MedPath, Inc. All rights reserved.