M B Kays1, G A Denys. 1. Department of Pharmacy Practice, Purdue University School of Pharmacy and Pharmacal Sciences, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202-2879, USA. mkays@iupui.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant strains of Streptococcus pneumoniae are increasingly common worldwide, but the clinical significance of their resistance to the macrolide antibiotics is controversial. Applying pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles can assist in the selection of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the in vitro activity of penicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and clindamycin against clinical isolates of S. pneumoniae and to evaluate the pharmacodynamics of azithromycin and clarithromycin based on serum and epithelial lining fluid (ELF) concentrations. METHODS: The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of penicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and clindamycin were determined for 307 isolates of S. pneumoniae using broth microdilution. Using serum and ELF concentrations after standard dosing, we calculated the proportion of isolates against which it would be possible to obtain a ratio of azithromycin area under the curve to MIC > or =25 and clarithromycin concentrations that exceeded the MIC for > or =40% of the dosing interval. RESULTS: Overall, 19.5%, 25.4%, 25.1%, and 7.2% of the 307 pneumococcal isolates were resistant to penicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and clindamycin, respectively. However, 71.7% of penicillin-resistant strains were also resistant to azithromycin and clarithromycin. Based on serum concentrations, clarithromycin achieved its pharmacodynamic target in 76.9% of isolates, compared with 59.9% for azithromycin. Based on ELF concentrations, clarithromycin achieved its pharmacodynamic target in 93.5% of isolates, compared with 74.6% for azithromycin. Based on ELF concentrations, clarithromycin achieved its pharmacodynamic target in 86.7% of penicillin-resistant isolates, compared with 28.3% for azithromycin. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of serum and ELF concentrations, clarithromycin achieved pharmacodynamic targets against a greater proportion of S. pneumoniae isolates than did azithromycin. Clinical studies are needed to determine the efficacy of these agents against pneumococci that demonstrate in vitro resistance using current susceptibility breakpoints.
BACKGROUND: Multidrug-resistant strains of Streptococcus pneumoniae are increasingly common worldwide, but the clinical significance of their resistance to the macrolide antibiotics is controversial. Applying pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles can assist in the selection of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the in vitro activity of penicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and clindamycin against clinical isolates of S. pneumoniae and to evaluate the pharmacodynamics of azithromycin and clarithromycin based on serum and epithelial lining fluid (ELF) concentrations. METHODS: The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of penicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and clindamycin were determined for 307 isolates of S. pneumoniae using broth microdilution. Using serum and ELF concentrations after standard dosing, we calculated the proportion of isolates against which it would be possible to obtain a ratio of azithromycin area under the curve to MIC > or =25 and clarithromycin concentrations that exceeded the MIC for > or =40% of the dosing interval. RESULTS: Overall, 19.5%, 25.4%, 25.1%, and 7.2% of the 307 pneumococcal isolates were resistant to penicillin, azithromycin, clarithromycin, and clindamycin, respectively. However, 71.7% of penicillin-resistant strains were also resistant to azithromycin and clarithromycin. Based on serum concentrations, clarithromycin achieved its pharmacodynamic target in 76.9% of isolates, compared with 59.9% for azithromycin. Based on ELF concentrations, clarithromycin achieved its pharmacodynamic target in 93.5% of isolates, compared with 74.6% for azithromycin. Based on ELF concentrations, clarithromycin achieved its pharmacodynamic target in 86.7% of penicillin-resistant isolates, compared with 28.3% for azithromycin. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of serum and ELF concentrations, clarithromycin achieved pharmacodynamic targets against a greater proportion of S. pneumoniae isolates than did azithromycin. Clinical studies are needed to determine the efficacy of these agents against pneumococci that demonstrate in vitro resistance using current susceptibility breakpoints.