| Literature DB >> 34107961 |
Xuesong Liu1,2, Qingwen Yang1,3, Yuying Fan1, Yuanyi Du1, Lei Lei1, Dong Wang1, Yun Liu4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enrofloxacin is an antibacterial drug with broad-spectrum activity that is widely indicated for veterinary use. We aim to develop the clinical applications of Enrofloxacin against colibacillosis by using the neutropenic mice thigh infection model.Entities:
Keywords: Enrofloxacin; Escherichia coli; Mice; Neutropenic thigh infection model; Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic integration model
Year: 2021 PMID: 34107961 PMCID: PMC8191022 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-021-02908-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Fig. 1ENR MIC distribution of 67 Escherichia coli strains. On the X-axis, MIC values were given while Y-axis represents strain number in all MIC values.
The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of Enrofloxacin against E. coli in Mueller-Hinton broth (MHB) and mice plasma
| MHB (μg/mL) | Mice plasma (μg/mL) | MHB/mice plasma ratio | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heilong 01 | 0.43 | 0.25 | 1.72 |
| Heilong 02 | 0.5 | 0.22 | 2.27 |
| Heilong 03 | 0.5 | 0.25 | 2 |
| Heilong 04 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 1.16 |
| Heilong 05 | 0.43 | 0.25 | 1.72 |
| Heilong 06 | 0.5 | 0.22 | 2.27 |
| Heilong 07 | 0.43 | 0.25 | 1.72 |
| Heilong 08 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 1.13 |
| Heilong 09 | 0.87 | 0.25 | 3.48 |
| Heilong 10 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 1.13 |
| Heilong 11 | 0.43 | 0.25 | 1.72 |
| Heilong 12 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 1.13 |
| Heilong 13 | 0.5 | 0.25 | 2 |
| Heilong 14 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 1.16 |
| Heilong 15 | 0.43 | 0.25 | 1.72 |
| Average | 0.418 | 0.236 | 1.76 |
Fig. 2The ENR concentration-time course following single s.c injection of 1.25, 2.5, 5, and 10 mg/kg
The CIP concentration (μg/mL) in neutropenic infected mice following single s.c injection
| Time (h) | Dosage regimen (mg/kg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.25 | 2.5 | 5 | 10 | |
| 0.083 | – | – | – | – |
| 0.167 | – | 0.029 ± 0.009 | 0.031 ± 0.011 | 0.037 ± 0.014 |
| 0.25 | 0.019 ± 0.007 | 0.037 ± 0.011 | 0.057 ± 0.019 | 0.09 ± 0.027 |
| 0.5 | 0.009 ± 0.002 | 0.019 ± 0.004 | 0.026 ± 0.009 | 0.056 ± 0.017 |
| 0.75 | – | 0.007 ± 0.002 | 0.009 ± 0.002 | 0.029 ± 0.009 |
| 1 | – | – | – | 0.017 ± 0.004 |
| 2 | – | – | – | 0.006 ± 0.001 |
The Pharmacokinetic parameters of ENR in neutropenic thigh infected mice plasma
| Parameter (units) | Does | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.25 | 2.5 | 5 | 10 | |
| T1/2e (h) | 1.65 | 1.61 | 1.32 | 1.37 |
| Tmax (h) | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.18 | 0.25 |
| AUC (μg.h/mL) | 0.62 | 0.96 | 1.92 | 3.14 |
| Cmax (μg/mL) | 0.27 | 0.51 | 1.06 | 1.97 |
| MRT (h) | 1.57 | 2.08 | 2.13 | 2.29 |
| Vss (L/kg) | 4.55 | 5.06 | 5.58 | 6.68 |
| CL (L/h.kg) | 2.71 | 2.66 | 2.47 | 2.93 |
| AUMC (μg.h2/mL) | 0.72 | 1.94 | 4.64 | 7.27 |
Cmax, maximum concentration in plasma; Tmax time to achieve maximum concentration; T1/2e, elimination half-life; AUC, area under the concentration-time curve; MRT, mean residence time; Vss, volume of distribution; CL, systemic clearance; AUMC, area under the first moment-time curve
Fig. 3The in-vitro killing curve of ENR against E. coli (Heilong 15). (A). Antibacterial effect starting with a bacterial density of 106 CFU/mL (B) Antibacterial effects starting with a bacterial density of 108 CFU/mL
Fig. 4In-vivo ENR PD studies via murine neutropenic thigh infection model. Each symbol shows the mean value of thigh bacterial infection from five infected mice (Escherichia coli Heilong 15). Twelve dose regimens of ENR were used to treat the E. coli Heilong 15 infection. The variations in the log10 number of colony-forming unit (CFU)/thigh were evaluated in the beginning and post 24 hrs of treatment. Data points under the horizontal dashed line indicate killing and points above the horizontal dashed line showed growth and development
The PK-PD parameter estimates for the dividing AUC0–24/MIC by 24 h to obtain different antibacterial effects
| Parameter | Values |
|---|---|
| Emax (log10 CFU/thigh) | 3.86 |
| E0 (log10 CFU/thigh) | −4.95 |
| EC50 (h) | 9.05 |
| N | 1.38 |
| Dividing AUC0–24/MIC by 24 h for bacteriostatic action | 0.325 |
| Dividing AUC0–24/MIC by 24 h for 1-log10 reduction | 0.4375 |
| Dividing AUC0–24/MIC by 24 h for 2-log10 reduction | 0.63 |
| Dividing AUC0–24/MIC by 24 h for 3-log10 reduction | 0.95 |
Emax is △logCFU24 h in the control sample (drug-free); E0 is △logCFU24 hrs in the experimental sample comprising ENR when the maximum potential against bacterial growth was obtained; EC50 represents the PK-PD index for the drug which shows 50% of the highest antibacterial effect; N represents Hill coefficient (demonstrating the steepness of the effect curve obtained from PK-PD index)
Fig. 5Relationship between AUC/MIC and E. E is defined as the reduction of bacterial count post 24 hrs of treatment. R2 represents the correlation coefficient
Fig. 6Relationship between Cmax/MIC and E. E is defined as the reduction of bacterial count post 24 hrs of treatment. R2 represents the correlation coefficient
Estimated doses for dairy cattle, steer and pig
| Animal species | Conversion | fu | Clearance | F | 1-log10 reduction | 3-log10 reduction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dairy cattle | 59% | 40.6% | 34.8 L/day/kg | 1 | 4.05 mg/kg | 11.1 mg/kg |
| Steer | 64% | 39.2% | 16.8 L/day/kg | 1 | 1.42 mg/kg | 6.78 mg/kg |
| Pig | 10% | 66% | 4.43 L/day/kg | 1 | 0.66 mg/kg | 1.45 mg/kg |
The conversion rate is the ENR to CIP. fu is the free (unbound) fraction. F is the absolute bioavailability. MIC90 is the 90th percentile of MIC distribution
Fig. 7The chromatogram of standard solution and test sample. (A) depicts the chromatogram of standard ENR solution, (B) depicts the chromatogram of standard CIP solution, while (C) shows the chromatogram of an isolated test sample that contain ENR along with its metabolite CIP