Literature DB >> 22752863

Antimicrobial activities of fidaxomicin.

Ellie J C Goldstein1, Farah Babakhani, Diane M Citron.   

Abstract

Fidaxomicin is bactericidal against Clostridium difficile. The combined results of 8 in vitro studies of 1323 C. difficile isolates showed the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) range of fidaxomicin to be ≤ 0.001-1 μg/mL, with a maximum MIC for inhibition of 90% of organisms (MIC(90)) of 0.5 μg/mL. Isolates from 2 phase III clinical trials demonstrated that fidaxomicin MICs of baseline isolates did not predict clinical cure, failure, or recurrence of C. difficile infections. No resistance to fidaxomicin developed during treatment in either study, although a single strain recovered from a cured patient had an elevated MIC of 16 µg/mL at the time of recurrence. For 135 strains, OP-1118, a major metabolite, had an MIC for inhibition of 50% of organisms of 4 μg/mL and an MIC(90) of 8 μg/mL. Changes in inoculum size (10(2)-10(5) colony-forming units/spot) or cation concentrations of calcium or magnesium appeared to have no effect on fidaxomicin MICs. Fidaxomicin has little or no activity against gram-negative aerobes and anaerobes or yeast.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22752863      PMCID: PMC3388021          DOI: 10.1093/cid/cis339

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Infect Dis        ISSN: 1058-4838            Impact factor:   9.079


In 1991, Swanson et al [1] evaluated the in vitro activity of tiacumicin B (now fidaxomicin) isolated from the fermentation broth of Dactylosporangium aurantiacum subspecies hamdenensis [2] against Clostridium difficile. Fidaxomicin (formerly designated OPT-80 and PAR-101) has been developed for the treatment of C. difficile–associated diarrhea and is a potent new macrocyclic antibiotic that targets RNA polymerase. Fidaxomicin has a narrow spectrum of activity, with little or no activity against gram-negative aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, but demonstrates high activity against C. difficile (Table 1) [3]. Fidaxomicin reaches a high concentration in the gut with minimal systemic absorption. This article reviews and provides original data for the antimicrobial activity of fidaxomicin, including variations of test conditions and activity of its metabolite OPT-1118, as well as its kill kinetics and pharmacodynamics as related to C. difficile.
Table 1.

Antimicrobial Profile of Fidaxomicin for Various Aerobic and Anaerobic Bacteria and Yeast

Gram-Negative Bacteria
Gram-Positive Bacteria
Yeast
StrainATCC No.FDX MICStrainATCC No.FDX MICStrainATCC No.FDX MIC
Acinetobacter baumannii19606>32Bacillus cereus117781Yeast
Acinetobacter calcoaceticus230551B. cereus145791Candida albicans24433>64
Bacteroides distasonis8503>32Clostridium difficile432550.125C. albicans90028>64
Bacteroides fragilis23745>32C. difficile96890.06C. albicans14053>64
B. fragilis25285>32C. difficile178570.031Candida krusei6258>64
Bacteroides ovatus8483>32Clostridium perfringens13124≤0.015Candida glabrata2001>64
Bacteroides uniformis8492>32Enterococcus faecalis194334Candida lusitaniae66035>64
Campylobacter jejuni2942864Enterococcus faecium194344Candida parapsilosis22019>64
C. jejuni33291>64E. faecium490324Candida tropicalis750>64
C. jejuni4994364E. faecium7002214
Citrobacter braakii43162>64Lactobacillus acidophilus4356>32
Citrobacter freundii43864>64Lactobacillus casei3931
Enterobacter aerogenes35028>64Lactobacillus rhamnosus746916
E. aerogenes13048>64Micrococcus luteus381≤0.125
Enterobacter cloacae49141>64M. luteus49732≤0.125
E. cloacae23355>32M. luteus533≤0.125
Escherichia coli25922>32M. luteus4698≤0.06
Fusobacterium nucleatum25586>32Peptostreptococcus anaerobius27337≤0.06
Haemophilus influenzae49247>32Peptostreptococcus (Peptoniphilus) asaccharolyticus297431
Helicobacter pylori43504>32Peptococcus (Finegoldia) magna293280.5
Klebsiella oxytoca43165>64Peptococcus (Micromonas) micros332700.125
K. oxytoca49131>64Propionibacterium acnes118278
Klebsiella pneumoniae33495>64P. acnes69198
K. pneumoniae27736>64Staphylococcus aureus335918
K. pneumoniae13883>32S. aureus2592316
Moraxella catarrhalis252382S. aureus292138
M. catarrhalis491431Staphylococcus epidermidis122281
Neisseria meningitidis1307764S. epidermidis149901
Neisseria gonorrhoeae194248Staphylococcus intermedius296634
N. gonorrhoeae4922632Streptococcus agalactiae1238616
Neisseria lactamica2397032S. agalactiae1381332
Porphyromonas asaccharolytica2526032Streptococcus pyogenes1961516
Prevotella loescheii15930>32Streptococcus pneumoniae49619>32
Proteus mirabilis25933>64Streptococcus sanguinis1055632
P. mirabilis29245>64 
Proteus penneri33519>64
Proteus vulgaris33420>64
Pseudomonas aeruginosa27853>32 
Salmonella choleraesuis19585>64 
S. choleraesuis14028>32 
Serratia marcescens43861>64 
S. marcescens8100>32 
Veillonella parvula1079032

Data are from [3].

Abbreviations: ATCC, American Type Culture Collection; FDX, fidaxomicin; MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration.

Antimicrobial Profile of Fidaxomicin for Various Aerobic and Anaerobic Bacteria and Yeast Data are from [3]. Abbreviations: ATCC, American Type Culture Collection; FDX, fidaxomicin; MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration.

Comparative In Vitro Studies

Eight studies performed on strains isolated between 1983 and 2010 have reported the comparative in vitro activity of fidaxomicin against C. difficile [1, 4–10] (Table 2). A combined total of 1323 isolates were reported with a minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) range of ≤0.001–1 μg/mL and a maximum MIC for inhibition of 90% of organisms (MIC90) of 0.5 μg/mL, which are far below the fidaxomicin levels found in feces after treatment.
Table 2.

In Vitro Activity of Fidaxomicin, Compared With Vancomycin and Metronidazole, Against Clostridium difficile Isolates From 8 Published Studies

MIC (μg/mL)
DrugNo. of isolatesRangeMIC50MIC90[Ref] Year/sites
Fidaxomicin160.12–0.250.250.25[1] 1991/US
Vancomycin0.5–10.51
Metronidazole0.12–0.50.250.5
Fidaxomicin207≤0.001–0.6250.0020.008[4] 2004/Europe
Vancomycin0.016–0.50.50.5
Metronidazole0.004–0.50.060.06
Fidaxomicin230.06–20.120.25[5] 2004/US
Vancomycin0.5–412
Metronidazole0.25–10.120.25
Fidaxomicin2080.06–10.250.5[8] 2008/Canada
Vancomycin0.5–40.51
Metronidazole0.25–40.51
Fidaxomicin1100.015–0.250.1250.125[6] 1983–2004/US
Vancomycin0.06–411
Metronidazole0.025–0.50.1250.25
Fidaxomicin21≤0.016–0.250.0160.12[7] 2004/US
Vancomycin0.5–212
Metronidazole≤0.125–0.50.250.5
Fidaxomicin38≤0.008–0.250.125[9] 2004–2005/US
Vancomycin0.25–21
Metronidazole0.25–21
Fidaxomicin716≤0.008–10.1250.5[10] 2005–2010/US & Europe
Vancomycin0.5–812
Metronidazole0.02–40.51

Abbreviations: MIC50, minimum inhibitory concentration for inhibition of 50% of organisms; MIC90, minimum inhibitory concentration for inhibition of 90% of organisms; US, United States.

In Vitro Activity of Fidaxomicin, Compared With Vancomycin and Metronidazole, Against Clostridium difficile Isolates From 8 Published Studies Abbreviations: MIC50, minimum inhibitory concentration for inhibition of 50% of organisms; MIC90, minimum inhibitory concentration for inhibition of 90% of organisms; US, United States. Hecht et al [6] reported on the in vitro activity of fidaxomicin against 110 toxigenic C. difficile clinical isolates collected during 1983–2004 in the United States, South America, and Europe. With the use of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) [11] supplemented Brucella agar dilution method, the fidaxomicin geometric mean MIC was 0.081 μg/mL, with a maximum MIC of 0.25 μg/mL and an MIC90 of 0.125 μg/mL. They did not note any variation of MIC related to year of isolation or restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) BI group status. A German study [4] that used the Wilkins-Chalgren broth microdilution method on isolates collected between 1986 and 2002 showed that all C. difficile strains were susceptible to ≤0.06 μg/mL of fidaxomicin and confirmed low MICs by agar dilution for a subset of isolates. A Manitoba, Canada, study [8] that used the CLSI agar dilution method on isolates collected between January and April 2007 showed that all C. difficile strains were susceptible to ≤1.0 μg/mL of fidaxomicin, with an MIC90 of 0.5 μg/mL.

Clinical Trial In Vitro Susceptibilities

Citron et al [9] reported the activity of fidaxomicin by REA type on C. difficile isolates recovered from the fidaxomicin phase II clinical trial for C. difficile infection. Thirty-eight of 49 enrolled subjects (78%) had a C. difficile organism isolated at baseline. Four subjects grew multiple colony types, with 1 of these subjects having 2 different REA-type strains. Fidaxomicin showed an MIC range of ≤0.008–0.125 μg/mL, with an MIC90 of 0.125 μg/mL. Samples from only 2 subjects who had a recurrence within 6 weeks of treatment yielded isolates with MICs within a dilution of those recovered at baseline. It was noted that the REA BI isolates had metronidazole and vancomycin, but not fidaxomicin, MIC90 values that were 2 dilutions higher than that for the non-BI strains. Goldstein et al [10] reported the activity of fidaxomicin by REA type on 716 C. difficile isolates from 2 fidaxomicin phase III studies (Table 3). For all pretreatment isolates, the fidaxomicin MIC range was ≤0.004–1.0 μg/mL, with an MIC for inhibition of 50% of organisms (MIC50) of 0.125 μg/mL and an MIC90 of 0.25 μg/mL. Analyzed by REA type, 244 of 718 isolates (35%) were from the BI group, with MICs generally higher for all 4 drugs tested (MIC90: fidaxomicin, 0.5; vancomycin, 2.0; metronidazole, 2.0; and rifaximin >256 µg/mL) than for the other REA types. Fidaxomicin susceptibility of baseline isolates did not predict clinical cure, failure, or recurrence for fidaxomicin (baseline MIC90, 0.25 µg/mL [range, ≤0.008–1 µg/mL]). No resistance to fidaxomicin developed during treatment in either phase III study, although a single strain isolated from a cured patient had an elevated fidaxomicin MIC of 16 µg/mL at the time of recurrence.
Table 3.

Fidaxomicin-Susceptibility Profiles, by Restriction Endonuclease Analysis Group, for 716 Clostridium difficile Strains Isolated at Baseline (per protocol population) From 2 Phase III Trials

REA GroupNo. of PatientsGeometric Mean (Range)MIC50 (μg/mL)MIC90 (μg/mL)
BI2440.18 (0.015–1)0.250.5
BK120.09 (0.03–0.25)0.060.125
CF70.09 (0.015–0.25)0.1250.25
DH40.25 (0.25–0.25)0.250.25
G540.08 (0.015–0.25)0.060.125
J430.02 (≤0.008–0.12)0.020.125
Nonspecific REA2600.08 (≤0.004–0.5)0.060.125
K150.07 (0.015–0.25)0.060.125
Y770.10 (0.015–0.5)0.1250.25
All strains7160.10 (≤0.004–1)0.1250.25

Copyright © American Society for Microbiology, Antimicrob Agents and Chemother 2011; 55:5194–9 [10].

Abbreviations: MIC50, minimum inhibitory concentration for inhibition of 50% of organisms; MIC90, minimum inhibitory concentration for inhibition of 90% of organisms; REA, restriction endonuclease analysis.

Fidaxomicin-Susceptibility Profiles, by Restriction Endonuclease Analysis Group, for 716 Clostridium difficile Strains Isolated at Baseline (per protocol population) From 2 Phase III Trials Copyright © American Society for Microbiology, Antimicrob Agents and Chemother 2011; 55:5194–9 [10]. Abbreviations: MIC50, minimum inhibitory concentration for inhibition of 50% of organisms; MIC90, minimum inhibitory concentration for inhibition of 90% of organisms; REA, restriction endonuclease analysis. Results of studies by Ackermann et al [4] and Credito and Applebaum [7] showing more potent activity of fidaxomicin against C. difficile than those of Karlowsky et al [8], Hecht et al [6], and Finegold et al [5] may have been related to the inclusion of higher numbers of clones with lower MICs. Although Credito and Applebaum [7] showed an MIC90 of 0.125 μg/mL, the MIC90 reported by Ackermann et al [4] was exceptionally low (0.008 μg/mL), which could alternatively be attributed to lower viability of cells when dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) was used as diluent and/or to use of an anaerobic environment with a higher carbon dioxide concentration (15% vs the CLSI-recommended 4%–7%), because carbon dioxide can acidify media.

Effect of Diluent, pH, Inoculum, and Cations on Susceptibility

Babakhani et al [12] found that variations in pH affected MICs. With use of both Brucella agar dilution and broth dilution methods, fidaxomicin MICs were unchanged between pH values of 6.2 and 7.0 but increased in a linear fashion and were 8-fold higher at pH values of 7.9–8.0. The organism was shown to grow poorly at a pH of 5.0. With use of the Wilkins-Chalgren broth microdilution method, Swanson et al [1] reported that the MICs of tiacumicin B against C. difficile American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) 9689 at pH values of 6.5 and 8.0 were unchanged or only 2-fold different from MICs determined at a pH of 7.3. The effects of inoculum concentrations of 102–105 colony-forming units/spot and of cation concentrations of calcium (at 33, 45, and 75 mg/L) or magnesium (21, 30, and 57 mg/L) were also studied [12]. Neither inoculum size nor cation concentration had an effect on fidaxomicin MICs for 2 reference C. difficile strains (ATCC 9689 and ATCC 700057) [12]. In contrast, as stated by the investigators, “vancomycin MICs increased progressively with increasing inoculum concentrations” [12, 2674–5]. Additionally, the investigators studied the effect of various commercial lots of media on MICs and reported no fidaxomicin MIC variation when tested with 3 different lots of commercially prepared supplemented Brucella agar media.

In Vitro Studies Against Enteric Flora

Ackermann et al [4] studied the activity of fidaxomicin against a limited number of eubacteria (26 isolates), lactobacilli (8), Propionibacterium acnes (16), Prevotella species (35), and Bacteroides fragilis (69) and found them generally not susceptible. MIC50 and MIC90 values were >128 μg/mL and >128 μg/mL, respectively, for B. fragilis and Prevotella species. Finegold et al [5] performed a more extensive study involving 453 intestinal bacteria and reported that streptococci, aerobic and facultative gram-negative rods, anaerobic gram-negative rods, and Clostridium ramosum were resistant, which might potentially be less disruptive to normal fecal flora. Against 50 isolates of the B. fragilis group, MIC50 was 256 μg/mL and MIC90 was >1024 μg/mL. They noted that fidaxomicin had activity against most clostridia, staphylococci, and enterococci. Clinical results in support of these in vitro studies were seen in the fidaxomicin phase IIA dose-ranging trial, in which 30 patient stool samples cultured for normal flora [13] showed that B. fragilis group counts were not affected by increasing fidaxomicin dosages.

OP-1118 In Vitro Activity

OP-1118 is a major metabolite of fidaxomicin that also exhibits a narrow spectrum of activity. Tested in vitro by using CLSI susceptibility testing methods against 32 strains belonging to the commensal gastrointestinal flora, OP-1118 demonstrated activity against only some gram-positive organisms, with MICs 4–16-fold greater than those of fidaxomicin [14]. Similar to the parent compound, OP-1118 was not active against gram-negative bacteria. We now report previously unpublished data regarding the in vitro activity of fidaxomicin and OP-1118 against 135 clinical strains of C. difficile isolated from patients in the 004 study who were compared by using the CLSI agar dilution method in M11-A7 [11]. An inoculum of 105 colony-forming units/mL of C. difficile ATCC 700057 was included as a quality control strain. OP-1118 was dissolved and diluted in DMSO to achieve final study concentrations that ranged from 0.004 to 128 μg/mL. The MIC50 and MIC90 for OP-1118 were 4 and 8 μg/mL, compared with 0.125 and 0.25 μg/mL, respectively, for fidaxomicin (Figure 1).
Figure 1.

Minimum inhibitory concentration distribution of fidaxomicin and OPT-1118 against 135 Clostridium difficile clinical isolates from the FDX-004 [14]. aRefers to ≤0.004 μg/mL (for 0.003) and ≤0.008 μg/mL (for 0.007). Abbreviation: MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration.

Minimum inhibitory concentration distribution of fidaxomicin and OPT-1118 against 135 Clostridium difficile clinical isolates from the FDX-004 [14]. aRefers to ≤0.004 μg/mL (for 0.003) and ≤0.008 μg/mL (for 0.007). Abbreviation: MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration.

Low Fecal-Binding Properties

The fecal-binding properties of fidaxomicin and OP-1118 were compared with those of vancomycin by testing their antibacterial activity in the presence or absence of 5% fecal material, using a microbroth dilution method. Similar to vancomycin, both fidaxomicin and OP-1118 demonstrated low fecal-binding properties, and their MICs against C. difficile increased only 4–8-fold in the presence of feces: the MIC of fidaxomicin increased from 0.25 to 2 μg/mL, and the MIC of OP-1118 increased from 1 to 4 μg/mL, with both increases much lower than the expected gut-level concentrations following oral administration of 400 mg/day of fidaxomicin [14].

Killing Kinetics

Fidaxomicin and its major metabolite, OP-1118, both demonstrate bactericidal activity against C. difficile strains, including the hypervirulent REA BI group strains. Exposure of C. difficile strains to fidaxomicin or OP-1118 at ≥4 times the MIC of each agent led to a ≥3 log decrease in colony-forming units in 48 hours, indicating time-dependent bactericidal activity [15]. Interestingly, fidaxomicin has been shown to be bactericidal against laboratory-generated mutant strains with reduced fidaxomicin susceptibility, indicating that with fecal concentrations that reach milligram-per-gram amounts, even mutant strains with increased fidaxomicin MICs are likely to be killed during therapy [15].

Susceptibility Breakpoints/Resistance

Results from fidaxomicin clinical trials have not demonstrated a correlation between MIC and clinical outcome [10, 16]. Although the MIC90 was shown to be 0.25 μg/mL in these trials, the highest reported MIC for wild-type isolates is 1 μg/mL. The only clinical isolate with reduced susceptibility was obtained from a subject with recurrence of disease 6 days following cure with fidaxomicin. The isolate at day 1 and the end of treatment had an MIC of 0.06 μg/mL, but the recurrence isolate demonstrated reduced susceptibility, with an MIC of 16 μg/mL, which is still less than gut-level concentrations of the drug (mean fidaxomicin and OP-1118 concentrations were reported as 1433 and 760 μg/g, respectively) [16]. The strain with reduced susceptibility has been analyzed further, and a single mutation in the β subunit of the RNA polymerase has been identified in only the isolate associated with recurrence (unpublished data). Similar mutations in the homologous positions in other bacterial species that demonstrate reduced susceptibility to lipiarmycin, a related macrocycle compound, have been reported [17, 18]. However, the functional significance of such mutations needs to be elucidated further because laboratory-generated isolates with similar mutations are rapidly killed by fidaxomicin at 4 times the MICs [15].

CONCLUSION

Fidaxomicin has excellent in vitro activity against C. difficile isolates of all REA types, including the epidemic BI strain. Resistance has not developed during therapy in clinical trials. Its lack of activity against enteric gram-negative flora should help maintain colonization resistance.
  15 in total

1.  In vitro activities of OPT-80 and comparator drugs against intestinal bacteria.

Authors:  Sydney M Finegold; Denise Molitoris; Marja-Liisa Vaisanen; Yuli Song; Chengxu Liu; Mauricio Bolaños
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  In vitro activity of OPT-80 tested against clinical isolates of toxin-producing Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  James A Karlowsky; Nancy M Laing; George G Zhanel
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-08-25       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Frequency and characterisation of spontaneous lipiarmycin-resistant Enterococcus faecalis mutants selected in vitro.

Authors:  Maxime Gualtieri; Audrey Tupin; Konstantin Brodolin; Jean-Paul Leonetti
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  2009-08-15       Impact factor: 5.283

4.  Killing kinetics of fidaxomicin and its major metabolite, OP-1118, against Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Farah Babakhani; Abraham Gomez; Nikki Robert; Pamela Sears
Journal:  J Med Microbiol       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 2.472

5.  Comparative susceptibilities to fidaxomicin (OPT-80) of isolates collected at baseline, recurrence, and failure from patients in two phase III trials of fidaxomicin against Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Ellie J C Goldstein; Diane M Citron; Pamela Sears; Farah Babakhani; Susan P Sambol; Dale N Gerding
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2011-08-15       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Effects of inoculum, pH, and cations on the in vitro activity of fidaxomicin (OPT-80, PAR-101) against Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  F Babakhani; J Seddon; N Robert; Y-K Shue; P Sears
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2010-03-22       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  OPT-80 eliminates Clostridium difficile and is sparing of bacteroides species during treatment of C. difficile infection.

Authors:  Thomas J Louie; Judy Emery; Walter Krulicki; Brendan Byrne; Manuel Mah
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-10-27       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Clinical outcomes, safety, and pharmacokinetics of OPT-80 in a phase 2 trial with patients with Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  T Louie; M Miller; C Donskey; K Mullane; E J C Goldstein
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-10-27       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Typing and susceptibility of bacterial isolates from the fidaxomicin (OPT-80) phase II study for C. difficile infection.

Authors:  D M Citron; F Babakhani; E J C Goldstein; K Nagaro; S Sambol; P Sears; Y-K Shue; D N Gerding
Journal:  Anaerobe       Date:  2009-09-12       Impact factor: 3.331

10.  In vitro activities of 15 antimicrobial agents against 110 toxigenic clostridium difficile clinical isolates collected from 1983 to 2004.

Authors:  David W Hecht; Minerva A Galang; Susan P Sambol; James R Osmolski; Stuart Johnson; Dale N Gerding
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2007-05-21       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  30 in total

Review 1.  Update on Antimicrobial Resistance in Clostridium difficile: Resistance Mechanisms and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing.

Authors:  Zhong Peng; Dazhi Jin; Hyeun Bum Kim; Charles W Stratton; Bin Wu; Yi-Wei Tang; Xingmin Sun
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 2.  Clostridium difficile infection: guideline-based diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Christoph Lübbert; Endres John; Lutz von Müller
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2014-10-24       Impact factor: 5.594

3.  Fidaxomicin and OP-1118 Inhibit Clostridium difficile Toxin A- and B-Mediated Inflammatory Responses via Inhibition of NF-κB Activity.

Authors:  Hon Wai Koon; Jiani Wang; Caroline C Mussatto; Christina Ortiz; Elaine C Lee; Diana Hoang-Ngoc Tran; Xinhua Chen; Ciaran P Kelly; Charalabos Pothoulakis
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 4.  Recent advances in the understanding of antibiotic resistance in Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Patrizia Spigaglia
Journal:  Ther Adv Infect Dis       Date:  2016-02

5.  Comparative microbiological studies of transcription inhibitors fidaxomicin and the rifamycins in Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Farah Babakhani; Jaime Seddon; Pamela Sears
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Trends in the susceptibility of commonly encountered clinically significant anaerobes and susceptibilities of blood isolates of anaerobes to 16 antimicrobial agents, including fidaxomicin and rifaximin, 2008-2012, northern Taiwan.

Authors:  F D Wang; C H Liao; Y T Lin; W H Sheng; P R Hsueh
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2014-06-15       Impact factor: 3.267

7.  A convergent approach toward fidaxomicin: Syntheses of the fully glycosylated northern and southern fragments.

Authors:  Ryan Hollibaugh; Xueliang Yu; Jef K De Brabander
Journal:  Tetrahedron       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 2.457

8.  U.S.-Based National Sentinel Surveillance Study for the Epidemiology of Clostridium difficile-Associated Diarrheal Isolates and Their Susceptibility to Fidaxomicin.

Authors:  D R Snydman; L A McDermott; N V Jacobus; C Thorpe; S Stone; S G Jenkins; E J C Goldstein; R Patel; B A Forbes; S Mirrett; S Johnson; D N Gerding
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2015-08-03       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Targeted Treatment for Bacterial Infections: Prospects for Pathogen-Specific Antibiotics Coupled with Rapid Diagnostics.

Authors:  Tucker Maxson; Douglas A Mitchell
Journal:  Tetrahedron       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 2.457

Review 10.  Antibacterials Developed to Target a Single Organism: Mechanisms and Frequencies of Reduced Susceptibility to the Novel Anti-Clostridium difficile Compounds Fidaxomicin and LFF571.

Authors:  Jennifer A Leeds
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 6.915

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.