Cesar A Arias1, Kavindra V Singh, Diana Panesso, Barbara E Murray. 1. Center for the Study of Emerging and Reemerging Pathogens, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 2.112, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Ceftobiprole is a novel broad-spectrum cephalosporin with good in vitro activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecalis. The objective of this study was to assess the in vivo activity of ceftobiprole against four strains of E. faecalis, including beta-lactamase- producing (Bla+) and vancomycin-resistant strains. METHODS: Mice were infected intraperitoneally with strains of E. faecalis: (i) the Bla+ strain HH22; (ii) two vancomycin-resistant strains (TX2484 and V583); and (iii) OG1RF (a laboratory strain), using 10 x the LD50 for each strain. Ceftobiprole doses of 25, 12.5 and 6.25 mg/kg (single doses) and ampicillin 50, 25, 12.5 and 6.25 mg/kg (single and double doses) were administered subcutaneously immediately after bacterial challenge and mice were monitored for 96 h. RESULTS: All four E. faecalis had ceftobiprole MICs <or=0.5 mg/L. Despite being susceptible in vitro at the standard inoculum, ampicillin (single and double doses) did not protect mice against intraperitoneal challenge with Bla+ E. faecalis HH22, with a 50% protective dose (PD50) of >100 mg/kg, whereas ceftobiprole was protective (PD50 of 2 mg/kg). Ceftobiprole PD50s for vancomycin-resistant isolates TX2484 and V583 were 7.7 and 5.2 mg/kg, respectively, similar to those of single dose ampicillin (12.5 and 16.4 mg/kg, respectively). For OG1RF, both ampicillin and ceftobiprole protected all mice at doses of 25 and 12.5 mg/kg, respectively, with a PD50 of 4.2 and 8 mg/kg for ceftobiprole and ampicillin, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftobiprole had comparable in vivo activity to that of ampicillin against vancomycin-resistant and ampicillin-susceptible strains of E. faecalis in the mouse peritonitis model. Ceftobiprole was superior in vivo to ampicillin against the Bla+ strain HH22. Our data support the further study of ceftobiprole as a therapeutic agent in humans infected with E. faecalis.
OBJECTIVES:Ceftobiprole is a novel broad-spectrum cephalosporin with good in vitro activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecalis. The objective of this study was to assess the in vivo activity of ceftobiprole against four strains of E. faecalis, including beta-lactamase- producing (Bla+) and vancomycin-resistant strains. METHODS:Mice were infected intraperitoneally with strains of E. faecalis: (i) the Bla+ strain HH22; (ii) two vancomycin-resistant strains (TX2484 and V583); and (iii) OG1RF (a laboratory strain), using 10 x the LD50 for each strain. Ceftobiprole doses of 25, 12.5 and 6.25 mg/kg (single doses) and ampicillin 50, 25, 12.5 and 6.25 mg/kg (single and double doses) were administered subcutaneously immediately after bacterial challenge and mice were monitored for 96 h. RESULTS: All four E. faecalis had ceftobiprole MICs <or=0.5 mg/L. Despite being susceptible in vitro at the standard inoculum, ampicillin (single and double doses) did not protect mice against intraperitoneal challenge with Bla+ E. faecalis HH22, with a 50% protective dose (PD50) of >100 mg/kg, whereas ceftobiprole was protective (PD50 of 2 mg/kg). Ceftobiprole PD50s for vancomycin-resistant isolates TX2484 and V583 were 7.7 and 5.2 mg/kg, respectively, similar to those of single dose ampicillin (12.5 and 16.4 mg/kg, respectively). For OG1RF, both ampicillin and ceftobiprole protected all mice at doses of 25 and 12.5 mg/kg, respectively, with a PD50 of 4.2 and 8 mg/kg for ceftobiprole and ampicillin, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Ceftobiprole had comparable in vivo activity to that of ampicillin against vancomycin-resistant and ampicillin-susceptible strains of E. faecalis in the mouseperitonitis model. Ceftobiprole was superior in vivo to ampicillin against the Bla+ strain HH22. Our data support the further study of ceftobiprole as a therapeutic agent in humans infected with E. faecalis.
Authors: A Stucki; M Cottagnoud; F Acosta; U Egerman; J Läuffer; P Cottagnoud Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2011-11-07 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Sandra Rincon; Diana Panesso; William R Miller; Kavindra V Singh; Melissa R Cruz; Ayesha Khan; An Q Dinh; Lorena Diaz; Rafael Rios; Yousif Shamoo; Jinnethe Reyes; Truc T Tran; Danielle A Garsin; Cesar A Arias Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Carlos A Rodriguez; Maria Agudelo; Javier M Gonzalez; Omar Vesga; Andres F Zuluaga Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-10-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Autumn Brown Gandt; Elizabeth C Griffith; Ida M Lister; Lisa L Billings; Angel Han; Rajendra Tangallapally; Ying Zhao; Aman P Singh; Richard E Lee; Michael D LaFleur Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2018-07-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Samir S Awad; Alejandro H Rodriguez; Yin-Ching Chuang; Zsuszanna Marjanek; Alex J Pareigis; Gilmar Reis; Thomas W L Scheeren; Alejandro S Sánchez; Xin Zhou; Mikaël Saulay; Marc Engelhardt Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 9.079