Literature DB >> 2129067

Interactions of antimicrobial combinations in vitro: the relativity of synergism.

J Blaser1.   

Abstract

Interactions of combinations of netilmicin, amikacin, piperacillin, imipenem, azlocillin, ceftazidime or moxalactam were studied in vitro against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus. Microtiter checkerboard technique was compared with standard killing curve method and with killing curves obtained in kinetic in vitro models mimicking single or multiple dosing regimens according to human pharmacokinetics. Antibiotic combinations were classified as antagonistic, indifferent or synergistic. Disagreement between classification by checkerboard and by kinetic model was found in 14 of 33 combinations studied (42%). Further analysis by standard killing curve method demonstrated that synergism or antagonism is a relative, not an absolute feature of drug combinations against given pathogens. Factors contributing to disagreements included the concentrations studied relative to the bacterial sensitivity, the ratio of concentrations of the two drugs tested, the size of the bacterial inoculum and the endpoint of the interaction assessment. Standard in vitro methods do not consider changes of antibiotic concentrations over time during combination therapy. Concentrations studied are defined according to bacterial sensitivity (fractions of MIC). Therefore, they may or may not relate to those at the infected site. The observed discrepancies between standard methods for testing drug interaction and a model which more closely reflects human pharmacokinetics support the argument that standard synergy testing provides incomplete data to reliably design clinical combination therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2129067

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Infect Dis Suppl        ISSN: 0300-8878


  6 in total

1.  Net effect of inoculum size on antimicrobial action of ampicillin-sulbactam: studies using an in vitro dynamic model.

Authors:  A A Firsov; M Ruble; D Gilbert; D Saverino; D Savarino; B Manzano; A A Medeiros; S H Zinner
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Use of pharmacodynamic indices to predict efficacy of combination therapy in vivo.

Authors:  J W Mouton; M L van Ogtrop; D Andes; W A Craig
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Prediction of the effects of inoculum size on the antimicrobial action of trovafloxacin and ciprofloxacin against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli in an in vitro dynamic model.

Authors:  A A Firsov; S N Vostrov; O V Kononenko; S H Zinner; Y A Portnoy
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Synergy of an investigational glycopeptide, LY333328, with once-daily gentamicin against vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium in a multiple-dose, in vitro pharmacodynamic model.

Authors:  S A Zelenitsky; B Booker; N Laing; J A Karlowsky; D J Hoban; G G Zhanel
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Fractional maximal effect method for in vitro synergy between amoxicillin and ceftriaxone and between vancomycin and ceftriaxone against Enterococcus faecalis and penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae.

Authors:  N Desbiolles; L Piroth; C Lequeu; C Neuwirth; H Portier; P Chavanet
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Antimicrobial treatment of serious gram-negative infections in newborns.

Authors:  James W Gray; Hirminder Ubhi; Philip Milner
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.725

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.