Literature DB >> 12936969

Pharmacodynamics of levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin in a murine pneumonia model: peak concentration/MIC versus area under the curve/MIC ratios.

F Scaglione1, J W Mouton, R Mattina, F Fraschini.   

Abstract

During the last decade some studies have shown that the area under the curve (AUC)/MIC ratio is the pharmacodynamic index that best predicts the efficacies of quinolones, while other studies suggest that the predictive value of the peak concentration/MIC (peak/MIC) ratio is superior to the AUC/MIC ratio in explaining clinical and microbiological outcomes. In classical fractionated dose-response studies with animals, it is difficult to differentiate between the AUC/MIC ratio and the peak/MIC ratio because of colinearity. Three different levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin dosing regimens were studied in a neutropenic mouse pneumonia model. The different regimens were used with the aim of increasing the AUC/MIC ratio without changing the peak/MIC ratio and vice versa. The first regimen (RC) consisted of daily doses of 5 up to 160 mg/kg of body weight divided into one, two, or four doses. In the second regimen (R0), mice were given 1.25 mg/kg every hour from 1 to 23 h, while the dose given at 0 h was 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg/kg. In the third regimen (R11), mice also received 1.25 mg/kg every hour from 0 to 23 h; but in addition, they also received 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg/kg at 11 h. The level of protein binding was also evaluated. The results indicate that the unbound fraction (f(u)) was concentration dependent for both levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin and ranged from approximately 0.67 to 0.88 for both drugs between concentrations of 0.5 and 80 mg/liter. The relationships between the AUC/MIC ratio and the number of CFU were slightly better than those between the peak/MIC ratio and the number of CFU. There was no clear relationship between the amount of time that the concentration remained above the MIC and effect (R(2) < 0.1). For both drugs, the peak/MIC ratio that resulted in a 50% effective concentration was lower for the R0 and R11 dosing regimens, indicating the importance of the AUC/MIC ratio. The same was true for the static doses. Survival studies showed that for mice treated with the low doses the rate of survival was comparable to that for the controls, but with the higher doses the rate of survival was better for mice receiving the R0 regimen. We conclude that for quinolones the AUC/MIC ratio best correlates with efficacy against pneumococci and that the effect of the peak/MIC ratio found in some studies could be partly explained by concentration-dependent protein binding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12936969      PMCID: PMC182632          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.9.2749-2755.2003

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


  31 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacokinetics of antibiotics in tissues and tissue fluids: a review.

Authors:  O Cars
Journal:  Scand J Infect Dis Suppl       Date:  1990

2.  Rapid stereospecific high-performance liquid chromatographic determination of levofloxacin in human plasma and urine.

Authors:  F A Wong; S J Juzwin; S C Flor
Journal:  J Pharm Biomed Anal       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 3.935

3.  Comparative study with enoxacin and netilmicin in a pharmacodynamic model to determine importance of ratio of antibiotic peak concentration to MIC for bactericidal activity and emergence of resistance.

Authors:  J Blaser; B B Stone; M C Groner; S H Zinner
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1987-07       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Penetration of danofloxacin into the respiratory tract tissues and secretions in calves.

Authors:  C Friis
Journal:  Am J Vet Res       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 1.156

5.  Comparative dose-effect relations at several dosing intervals for beta-lactam, aminoglycoside and quinolone antibiotics against gram-negative bacilli in murine thigh-infection and pneumonitis models.

Authors:  J E Leggett; S Ebert; B Fantin; W A Craig
Journal:  Scand J Infect Dis Suppl       Date:  1990

6.  Comparative efficacies of levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae in a mouse model of experimental septicaemia.

Authors:  C O Onyeji; K Q Bui; R C Owens; D P Nicolau; R Quintiliani; C H Nightingale
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 5.283

7.  Twenty-four-hour area under the concentration-time curve/MIC ratio as a generic predictor of fluoroquinolone antimicrobial effect by using three strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and an in vitro pharmacodynamic model.

Authors:  K J Madaras-Kelly; B E Ostergaard; L B Hovde; J C Rotschafer
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Dose ranging and fractionation of intravenous ciprofloxacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro model of infection.

Authors:  C R Marchbanks; J R McKiel; D H Gilbert; N J Robillard; B Painter; S H Zinner; M N Dudley
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Pharmacodynamics of a fluoroquinolone antimicrobial agent in a neutropenic rat model of Pseudomonas sepsis.

Authors:  G L Drusano; D E Johnson; M Rosen; H C Standiford
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 5.191

10.  Pharmacodynamics of intravenous ciprofloxacin in seriously ill patients.

Authors:  A Forrest; D E Nix; C H Ballow; T F Goss; M C Birmingham; J J Schentag
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  18 in total

1.  Quinolone efflux pumps play a central role in emergence of fluoroquinolone resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae.

Authors:  Nelson L Jumbe; Arnold Louie; Michael H Miller; Weiguo Liu; Mark R Deziel; Vincent H Tam; Reetu Bachhawat; George L Drusano
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Efficacy of fluoroquinolones against Leptospira interrogans in a hamster model.

Authors:  Matthew E Griffith; James E Moon; Erica N Johnson; Kyra P Clark; Joshua S Hawley; Duane R Hospenthal; Clinton K Murray
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2007-04-30       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 3.  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

4.  Moxifloxacin, ofloxacin, sparfloxacin, and ciprofloxacin against Mycobacterium tuberculosis: evaluation of in vitro and pharmacodynamic indices that best predict in vivo efficacy.

Authors:  Radha K Shandil; Ramesh Jayaram; Parvinder Kaur; Sheshagiri Gaonkar; B L Suresh; B N Mahesh; R Jayashree; Vrinda Nandi; Sowmya Bharath; V Balasubramanian
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2006-12-04       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 5.  Don't Get Wound Up: Revised Fluoroquinolone Breakpoints for Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Tam T Van; Emi Minejima; Chiao An Chiu; Susan M Butler-Wu
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-06-25       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Modification of enrofloxacin treatment regimens for poultry experimentally infected with Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium DT104 to minimize selection of resistance.

Authors:  Luke P Randall; Sue W Cooles; Nick C Coldham; Ken S Stapleton; Laura J V Piddock; Martin J Woodward
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2006-10-09       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Effect of differences in MIC values on clinical outcomes in patients with bloodstream infections caused by gram-negative organisms treated with levofloxacin.

Authors:  Robyn Defife; Marc H Scheetz; Joe M Feinglass; Michael J Postelnick; Kimberly K Scarsi
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nemonoxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae in an in vitro infection model.

Authors:  Wang Liang; Yuan-cheng Chen; Yu-ran Cao; Xiao-fang Liu; Jun Huang; Jia-li Hu; Miao Zhao; Qing-lan Guo; Shu-jing Zhang; Xiao-jie Wu; De-mei Zhu; Ying-yuan Zhang; Jing Zhang
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2013-04-15       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Concentrations of besifloxacin, gatifloxacin, and moxifloxacin in human conjunctiva after topical ocular administration.

Authors:  Gail Torkildsen; Joel W Proksch; Aron Shapiro; Stephanie K Lynch; Timothy L Comstock
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-04-26

10.  In Vivo Pharmacodynamic Target Assessment of Antofloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus in a Neutropenic Murine Pneumonia Model.

Authors:  Yu-Feng Zhou; Ping Liu; Shu-He Dai; Jian Sun; Ya-Hong Liu; Xiao-Ping Liao
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.