Literature DB >> 20178475

New concepts in antimicrobial susceptibility testing: the mutant prevention concentration and mutant selection window approach.

Joseph M Blondeau1.   

Abstract

Current measurements of antimicrobial susceptibility or resistance utilize a standardized bacterial inoculum (10(5) cfu/mL) exposed to varying drug concentrations in a test tube. Following incubation under ideal conditions, the lowest drug concentration inhibiting growth is the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). When the MIC exceeds the amount of drug that can be safely achieved in the body, we call these microorganisms resistant; established breakpoints for various 'bug-drug' combinations are used to categorize microorganisms as susceptible, intermediate or resistant. MIC testing has been used for decades to guide antimicrobial therapy and remains an important measurement for infectious diseases. More recently, the mutant prevention concentration (MPC) has been described as a novel measurement of in vitro susceptibility or resistance and is based on the testing of larger bacterial inocula, i.e. > or =10(9) cfu/mL - such as those associated with some infections in humans and animals. MPC defines the lowest drug concentration required to block the growth of the least susceptible cell present in high density bacterial populations. MPC testing applies to microorganisms considered susceptible to the drug by MIC testing. The mutant selection window (MSW) defines the 'danger zone' for therapeutic drug concentrations. Minimizing the length of time the drug concentration remains in the MSW may reduce the likelihood for resistance selection during therapy. The MSW is bordered by the MIC and MPC values and the drug concentration range between the measured MIC and MPC values defines the MSW. MPC values, when considered with drug pharmacology, may allow prediction on the probability of resistance selection when bacteria are exposed to antimicrobial agents during therapy for infectious diseases. In today's environment, resistance prevention should be a goal of antimicrobial therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20178475     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3164.2009.00856.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Dermatol        ISSN: 0959-4493            Impact factor:   1.589


  31 in total

Review 1.  Dosing regimen matters: the importance of early intervention and rapid attainment of the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target.

Authors:  Marilyn N Martinez; Mark G Papich; George L Drusano
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2012-02-27       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Discovery of inhibitors of 4'-phosphopantetheine adenylyltransferase (PPAT) to validate PPAT as a target for antibacterial therapy.

Authors:  Boudewijn L M de Jonge; Grant K Walkup; Sushmita D Lahiri; Hoan Huynh; Georg Neckermann; Luke Utley; Tory J Nash; Jesse Brock; Maryann San Martin; Amy Kutschke; Michele Johnstone; Valerie Laganas; Laurel Hajec; Rong-Fang Gu; Haihong Ni; Brendan Chen; Kim Hutchings; Elise Holt; David McKinney; Ning Gao; Stephania Livchak; Jason Thresher
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Cholic Acid-Peptide Conjugates as Potent Antimicrobials against Interkingdom Polymicrobial Biofilms.

Authors:  Siddhi Gupta; Jyoti Thakur; Sanjay Pal; Ragini Gupta; Deepakkumar Mishra; Sandeep Kumar; Kavita Yadav; Amandeep Saini; Prabhu S Yavvari; Madhukar Vedantham; Archana Singh; Aasheesh Srivastava; Rajendra Prasad; Avinash Bajaj
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  In Vitro Resistance Selection in Shigella flexneri by Azithromycin, Ceftriaxone, Ciprofloxacin, Levofloxacin, and Moxifloxacin.

Authors:  George P Allen; Kayla A Harris
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Evaluation of meropenem regimens suppressing emergence of resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii with human simulated exposure in an in vitro intravenous-infusion hollow-fiber infection model.

Authors:  Xin Li; Lin Wang; Xian-Jia Zhang; Yang Yang; Wei-Tao Gong; Bin Xu; Ying-Qun Zhu; Wei Liu
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2014-09-02       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Minimal inhibitory and mutant prevention concentrations of azithromycin, clarithromycin and erythromycin for clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae.

Authors:  Kelli Metzler; Karl Drlica; Joseph M Blondeau
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 5.790

7.  Environmental selection and epistasis in an empirical phenotype-environment-fitness landscape.

Authors:  J Z Chen; D M Fowler; N Tokuriki
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 19.100

8.  Phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility of environmental bacteria from mastitic milk of pastured dairy cows of S. Miguel (Azores).

Authors:  João Simões; M Branco; J Andrade; A Müller
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2019-08-02       Impact factor: 1.559

9.  Mutant prevention concentration of orbifloxacin: comparison between Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus pseudintermedius of canine origin.

Authors:  Takae Shimizu; Kazuki Harada; Yasushi Kataoka
Journal:  Acta Vet Scand       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 1.695

10.  Dalbavancin exposure in vitro selects for dalbavancin-non-susceptible and vancomycin-intermediate strains of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Brian J Werth; Nathaniel K Ashford; Kelsi Penewit; Adam Waalkes; Elizabeth A Holmes; Dylan H Ross; Tianwei Shen; Kelly M Hines; Stephen J Salipante; Libin Xu
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2020-08-28       Impact factor: 13.310

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.