Literature DB >> 10049257

Prediction of the effects of inoculum size on the antimicrobial action of trovafloxacin and ciprofloxacin against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli in an in vitro dynamic model.

A A Firsov1, S N Vostrov, O V Kononenko, S H Zinner, Y A Portnoy.   

Abstract

The effect of inoculum size (N0) on antimicrobial action has not been extensively studied in in vitro dynamic models. To investigate this effect and its predictability, killing and regrowth kinetics of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli exposed to monoexponentially decreasing concentrations of trovafloxacin (as a single dose) and ciprofloxacin (two doses at a 12-h interval) were compared at N0 = 10(6) and 10(9) CFU/ml (S. aureus) and at N0 = 10(6), 10(7), and 10(9) CFU/ml (E. coli). A series of pharmacokinetic profiles of trovafloxacin and ciprofloxacin with respective half-lives of 9.2 and 4 h were simulated at different ratios of area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) to MIC (in [micrograms x hours/milliliter]/[micrograms/milliliter]): 58 to 466 with trovafloxacin and 116 to 932 with ciprofloxacin for S. aureus and 58 to 233 and 116 to 466 for E. coli, respectively. Although the effect of N0 was more pronounced for E. coli than for S. aureus, only a minor increase in minimum numbers of surviving bacteria and an almost negligible delay in their regrowth were associated with an increase of the N0 for both organisms. The N0-induced reductions of the intensity of the antimicrobial effect (IE, area between control growth and the killing-regrowth curves) were also relatively small. However, the N0 effect could not be eliminated either by simple shifting of the time-kill curves obtained at higher N0s by the difference between the higher and lowest N0 or by operating with IEs determined within the N0-adopted upper limits of bacterial numbers (IE's). By using multivariate correlation and regression analyses, linear relationships between IE and log AUC/MIC and log N0 related to the respective mean values [(log AUC/MIC)average and (log N0)average] were established for both trovafloxacin and ciprofloxacin against each of the strains (r2 = 0.97 to 0.99). The antimicrobial effect may be accurately predicted at a given AUC/MIC of trovafloxacin or ciprofloxacin and at a given N0 based on the relationship IE = a + b [(log AUC/MIC)/(log AUC/MIC)average] - c [(log N0)/(log N0)average]. Moreover, the relative impacts of AUC/MIC and N0 on IE may be evaluated. Since the c/b ratios for trovafloxacin and ciprofloxacin against E. coli were much lower (0.3 to 0.4) than that for ampicillin-sulbactam as examined previously (1.9), the inoculum effect with the quinolones may be much less pronounced than with the beta-lactams. The described approach to the analysis of the inoculum effect in in vitro dynamic models might be useful in studies with other antibiotic classes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10049257      PMCID: PMC89150     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  12 in total

1.  Quantitative analysis of antimicrobial effect kinetics in an in vitro dynamic model.

Authors:  A A Firsov; V M Chernykh; S M Navashin
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Net effect of inoculum size on antimicrobial action of ampicillin-sulbactam: studies using an in vitro dynamic model.

Authors:  A A Firsov; M Ruble; D Gilbert; D Saverino; D Savarino; B Manzano; A A Medeiros; S H Zinner
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Pharmacokinetics and penetration into inflammatory fluid of trovafloxacin (CP-99,219).

Authors:  R Wise; D Mortiboy; J Child; J M Andrews
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  The comparative pharmacokinetics of five quinolones.

Authors:  R Wise; D Lister; C A McNulty; D Griggs; J M Andrews
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 5.790

5.  Antibacterial activity of aminosidine and of beta-lactamic antibiotics.

Authors:  A Sanfilippo; R Mazzoleni
Journal:  Farmaco Prat       Date:  1974-01

6.  Inter- and intraquinolone predictors of antimicrobial effect in an in vitro dynamic model: new insight into a widely used concept.

Authors:  A A Firsov; A A Shevchenko; S N Vostrov; S H Zinner
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Predictors of effect of ampicillin-sulbactam against TEM-1 beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli in an in vitro dynamic model: enzyme activity versus MIC.

Authors:  A A Firsov; D Saverino; D Savarino; M Ruble; D Gilbert; B Manzano; A A Medeiros; S H Zinner
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Pharmacokinetics and safety of trovafloxacin (CP-99,219), a new quinolone antibiotic, following administration of single oral doses to healthy male volunteers.

Authors:  R Teng; S C Harris; D E Nix; J J Schentag; G Foulds; T E Liston
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 5.790

9.  Evaluation of ceftriaxone and other antibiotics against Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Streptococcus pneumoniae under in vitro conditions simulating those of serious infections.

Authors:  G Satta; G Cornaglia; G Foddis; R Pompei
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 5.191

10.  Pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin after oral and parenteral administration.

Authors:  G Höffken; H Lode; C Prinzing; K Borner; P Koeppe
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Issues in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anti-infective agents: kill curves versus MIC.

Authors:  Markus Mueller; Amparo de la Peña; Hartmut Derendorf
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Phenotypic tolerance: antibiotic enrichment of noninherited resistance in bacterial populations.

Authors:  C Wiuff; R M Zappala; R R Regoes; K N Garner; F Baquero; B R Levin
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Influence of inoculum size on the selection of resistant mutants of Escherichia coli in relation to mutant prevention concentrations of marbofloxacin.

Authors:  Aude Ferran; Véronique Dupouy; Pierre-Louis Toutain; Alain Bousquet-Mélou
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2007-08-20       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Efficacy of ciprofloxacin in an experimental model of Escherichia coli chorioamnionitis in rabbits.

Authors:  Elise Launay; Nicolas Joram; Cédric Jacqueline; Anne Francoise Miegeville; Jocelyne Caillon; Gilles Potel; Jean Christophe Roze; Christèle Gras-Le Guen
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Activities of moxifloxacin against, and emergence of resistance in, Streptococcus pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in an in vitro pharmacokinetic model.

Authors:  Alasdair P MacGowan; Chris A Rogers; H Alan Holt; Karen E Bowker
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Novel concentration-killing curve method for estimation of bactericidal potency of antibiotics in an in vitro dynamic model.

Authors:  Y Q Liu; Y Z Zhang; P J Gao
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Pharmacodynamics of antimicrobials against Mycoplasma mycoides mycoides small colony, the causative agent of contagious bovine pleuropneumonia.

Authors:  John D Mitchell; Quintin A McKellar; Declan J McKeever
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Microscopic Analysis of Bacterial Inoculum Effect Using Micropatterned Biochip.

Authors:  Jung Ho Hwang; Sang Young Lee; Jungil Choi
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-13
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.