| Literature DB >> 26870006 |
Jianyi Wang1, Haihong Hao1, Lingli Huang1, Zhenli Liu2, Dongmei Chen3, Zonghui Yuan4.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to optimize the dose regimens of enrofloxacin to reduce the development of fluoroquinolone resistance in Escherichia coli (E.coli) using pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) modeling approach. The single dose (2.5 mg/kg body weight) of enrofloxacin was administered intramuscularly (IM) to the healthy pigs. Using cannulation, the pharmacokinetic properties, including peak concentration (C max), time to reach C max (T max), and area under the curve (AUC), were determined in plasma and ileum content. The C max, T max, and AUC in the plasma were 1.09 ± 0.11 μg/mL, 1.27 ± 0.35 h, and 12.70 ± 2.72 μg·h/mL, respectively. While in ileum content, the C max, T max, and AUC were 7.07 ± 0.26 μg/mL, 5.54 ± 0.42 h, and 136.18 ± 12.50 μg·h/mL, respectively. Based on the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) data of 918 E. coli isolates, an E. coli O101/K99 strain (enrofloxacin MIC = 0.25 μg/mL) was selected for pharmacodynamic studies. The in vitro minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC), mutant prevention concentration (MPC), and ex vivo time-killing curves for enrofloxacin in ileum content were established against the selected E. coli O101/K99 strain. Integrating the in vivo pharmacokinetic data and ex vivo pharmacodynamic data, a sigmoid E max (Hill) equation was established to provide values for ileum content of AUC24h/MIC producing, bactericidal activity (52.65 h), and virtual eradication of bacteria (78.06 h). A dosage regimen of 1.96 mg/kg every 12 h for 3 days should be sufficient in the treatment of E. coli.Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia coli; PK/PD modeling; enrofloxacin; pharmacodynamic; pharmacokinetic; pig
Year: 2016 PMID: 26870006 PMCID: PMC4735354 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00036
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Figure 1Enrofloxacin concentration-time profiles plotted for plasma, ileum content after IM administration. Values are mean ± SD (n = 6).
Pharmacokinetics of enrofloxacin in plasma and ileum content after IM administration (values are mean ± SD, .
| AUC | 12.70±2.72 | 136.18±12.50 |
| T½abs | 0.28±0.10 | 2.05±0.41 |
| T½el | 6.69±1.71 | 8.50±1.66 |
| 1.27±0.35 | 5.54±0.42 | |
| 1.09±0.11 | 7.07±0.26 | |
| V/F | 2.17±1.16 | 0.22±0.37 |
| CL/F | 0.20±1.08 | 0.072±0.18 |
| MRT | 8.48±0.67 | 14.38±0.03 |
AUC, Area under the concentration-time curve; T½abs, First order absorption rate constant; T½el, First order elimination rate constant; CL/F, Systemic clearance; V/F, Volume of distribution; MRT, Mean residence time.
Susceptibilities (MIC.
| Enrofloxacin | 2 | 32 | 0.015–128 | 0.125 | 0.25 | 0.015–0.5 |
n, total number of isolates studied.
n, susceptible strains based on the CLSI breakpoints.
MIC, MBC, and MPC (μg/mL) of enrofloxacin against .
| MHB | 0.25 | 0.5 | 7.2 |
| Plasma | 0.25 | 1 | – |
| Ileum content | 0.5 | 2 | – |
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
PK/PD integration parameters for enrofloxacin in ileum content after intramuscular injection of enrofloxacin at a dose rate of 2.5 mg/kg (.
| – | 14.14 | |
| – | 1 | |
| AUC24h/MIC | – | 272.36 |
| AUC24h/MPC | – | 18.9 |
| T>MIC | h | 33.54 ± 1.47 |
| T>MBC | h | 16.89 ± 2.56 |
PK/PD Modeling of .
| h·μg/mL | 2.23 ± 0.50 | |
| EC50 | μg/mL | 34.17 ± 3.26 |
| E0 | μg/mL | −5.34±0.13 |
| N | μg/mL | 1.86 ± 0.39 |
| – | 7.57 ± 0.98 | |
| Bacteriostatic ( | – | 21.37 ± 1.85 |
| Bactericidal ( | h | 52.65 ± 3.78 |
| Eradication ( | h | 78.06 ± 2.41 |
Figure 4Simulate the effect of different doses (0.78, 1.96, 2.8 mg/kg). The effects of different doses were observed on bacteria and its elimination.
Figure 5Simulate different dosage regimen (0.78 mg/kg every 24 h, 1.96 mg/kg every 12 h and 2.8 mg/kg every 24 h). The different doses were simulated for different intervals of time to find the efficient dose and dose intervals.