Literature DB >> 11605716

Clinical use of ceftriaxone: a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic perspective on the impact of minimum inhibitory concentration and serum protein binding.

T R Perry1, J J Schentag.   

Abstract

Ceftriaxone is a third-generation cephalosporin that is used for a variety of infections such as meningitis, gonorrhoea and community-acquired pneumonia. The most important aspects of its pharmacokinetics include a long half-life, excellent tissue penetration and saturable (dose-dependent) serum protein binding of the drug. A pharmacodynamic analysis [total area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)/minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC)] was performed in several populations (healthy volunteers, children, the elderly, and patients with renal and hepatic impairment) against various bacterial species (Streptococcus pneumoniae, the Enterobacteriacieae, methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa). AUC/MIC [area under the inhibitory time curve (AUIC)] was chosen as the pharmacodynamic parameter for this analysis since ceftriaxone is a time-dependent killer and high peak concentrations are not needed. In addition, there is a significant correlation between AUIC, time when concentration exceeds the MIC (t > MIC) and time to eradication. Total and free AUICs (assuming a free fraction = 10%) were calculated since it is highly protein bound. It was postulated that a free AUIC of at least 125 would be required to achieve efficacy. From our analysis of these various populations, we were able to conclude that the free AUIC values support the use of Ig daily in infections where MIC values are below 2 mg/L. In addition, consistent with its reported good activity against CSF organisms with MICs < or =1.0 mg/L and marginal activity against organisms with MICs > or =2.0 mg/L, we also recommend the target free AUIC values of at least 125 for patients with severe infections such as meningitis. Patients with mild infections may recover with values below 125 but they may remain at risk of the development of resistant organisms. Furthermore, it is essential to further validate these findings in patients who have received treatment, calculate AUICs and correlate these parameters with both clinical and microbiological outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11605716     DOI: 10.2165/00003088-200140090-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet        ISSN: 0312-5963            Impact factor:   6.447


  29 in total

1.  Mathematical examination of dual individualization principles (I): Relationships between AUC above MIC and area under the inhibitory curve for cefmenoxime, ciprofloxacin, and tobramycin.

Authors:  J J Schentag; D E Nix; M H Adelman
Journal:  DICP       Date:  1991-10

2.  Study of the influence of protein binding on serum bactericidal titres and killing rates in volunteers receiving ceftazidime, cefotaxime and ceftriaxone.

Authors:  P Van der Auwera; J Klastersky
Journal:  J Hosp Infect       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 3.926

3.  Pharmacodynamic evaluation of factors associated with the development of bacterial resistance in acutely ill patients during therapy.

Authors:  J K Thomas; A Forrest; S M Bhavnani; J M Hyatt; A Cheng; C H Ballow; J J Schentag
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Multiple intravenous dose pharmacokinetics of ceftriaxone in man.

Authors:  I H Patel; K Miller; R Weinfeld; J Spicehandler
Journal:  Chemotherapy       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 2.544

5.  Ceftriaxone pharmacokinetics in patients with various degrees of renal impairment.

Authors:  I H Patel; J G Sugihara; R E Weinfeld; E G Wong; A W Siemsen; S J Berman
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1984-04       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Single-dose pharmacokinetics of ceftriaxone in infants and young children.

Authors:  U B Schaad; K Stoeckel
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1982-02       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Pharmacokinetics of ceftriaxone in patients with renal and liver insufficiency and correlations with a physiologic nonlinear protein binding model.

Authors:  K Stoeckel; J R Koup
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1984-10-19       Impact factor: 4.965

8.  Age-associated changes in ceftriaxone pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  W L Hayton; K Stoeckel
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1986 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 9.  The importance of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic surrogate markers to outcome. Focus on antibacterial agents.

Authors:  J M Hyatt; P S McKinnon; G S Zimmer; J J Schentag
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 10.  Clinical pharmacokinetics of ceftriaxone.

Authors:  J H Yuk; C H Nightingale; R Quintiliani
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 6.447

View more
  22 in total

1.  Pharmacokinetics and dosage regimen of ceftriaxone in buffalo calves.

Authors:  M S Dardi; S K Sharma; A K Srivastava
Journal:  Vet Res Commun       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.459

2.  Population pharmacokinetics of ceftriaxone and pharmacodynamic considerations in haemodialysed patients.

Authors:  Nicolas Simon; Bertrand Dussol; Emmanuelle Sampol; Raj Purgus; Philippe Brunet; Bruno Lacarelle; Yvon Berland; Bernard Bruguerolle; Saïk Urien
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 3.  Protein binding of antimicrobials: methods for quantification and for investigation of its impact on bacterial killing.

Authors:  Jürgen Beer; Claudia Christina Wagner; Markus Zeitlinger
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2009-01-01       Impact factor: 4.009

4.  Effect of protein binding on the pharmacological activity of highly bound antibiotics.

Authors:  Stephan Schmidt; Katharina Röck; Martina Sahre; Olaf Burkhardt; Martin Brunner; Maximilian T Lobmeyer; Hartmut Derendorf
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-09-08       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Attenuation of ethanol withdrawal by ceftriaxone-induced upregulation of glutamate transporter EAAT2.

Authors:  Osama A Abulseoud; Ulas M Camsari; Christina L Ruby; Aimen Kasasbeh; Sun Choi; Doo-Sup Choi
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 7.853

Review 6.  Protein binding: do we ever learn?

Authors:  Markus A Zeitlinger; Hartmut Derendorf; Johan W Mouton; Otto Cars; William A Craig; David Andes; Ursula Theuretzbacher
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2011-05-02       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 7.  Importance of relating efficacy measures to unbound drug concentrations for anti-infective agents.

Authors:  Daniel Gonzalez; Stephan Schmidt; Hartmut Derendorf
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 26.132

8.  Amplification of Antimicrobial Resistance in Gut Flora of Patients Treated with Ceftriaxone.

Authors:  J Meletiadis; A Turlej-Rogacka; A Lerner; A Adler; E Tacconelli; J W Mouton
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Systemic pharmacokinetics and cerebrospinal fluid uptake of intravenous ceftriaxone in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Authors:  Yanli Zhao; Merit E Cudkowicz; Jeremy M Shefner; Lisa Krivickas; William S David; Francine Vriesendorp; Alan Pestronk; James B Caress; Jonathan Katz; Ericka Simpson; Jeffrey Rosenfeld; Robert Pascuzzi; Jonathan Glass; Kourosh Rezania; Jerold S Harmatz; David Schoenfeld; David J Greenblatt
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2014-05-16       Impact factor: 3.126

10.  Ertapenem pharmacokinetics and impact on intestinal microflora, in comparison to those of ceftriaxone, after multiple dosing in male and female volunteers.

Authors:  Mathias W R Pletz; Mareike Rau; Juergen Bulitta; Andres De Roux; Olaf Burkhardt; Guido Kruse; Michael Kurowski; Carl E Nord; Hartmut Lode
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.