Literature DB >> 7681376

Cefprozil. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential.

L R Wiseman1, P Benfield.   

Abstract

Cefprozil is an orally active cephalosporin which has demonstrated activity against a wide range of organisms in vitro. It is particularly active against the Gram-positive organisms Streptococcus pyogenes, pneumoniae and agalactiae and against methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Strains of methicillin-resistant S. aureus are not susceptible to cefprozil. Cefprozil is also moderately active against Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, many Enterobacteriaceae and certain anaerobic organisms, and is relatively stable to hydrolysis by a number of beta-lactamases. In comparative trials, the clinical and bacteriological efficacy of cefprozil 500mg or 20 mg/kg administered once or twice daily has been comparable with multiple daily dosage regimens of erythromycin in patients with tonsillitis or pharyngitis, with cefaclor and amoxicillin/clavulanate in lower respiratory tract infections, with amoxicillin/clavulanate and erythromycin in skin and skin-structure infections and with cefaclor in acute uncomplicated urinary tract infections. The clinical efficacy of cefprozil is similar to that of cefaclor in patients with tonsillitis or pharyngitis but the bacteriological efficacy of cefprozil is significantly greater than that of cefaclor. Cefprozil is clinically more effective than cefuroxime axetil in the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections and demonstrated greater efficacy than cefaclor in one of 2 comparative studies when administered twice daily in patients with skin and skin-structure infections. In children with acute otitis media, cefprozil 15 mg/kg twice daily was as effective as cefaclor or amoxicillin/clavulanate 13.3 mg/kg 3 times daily and was as effective as cefixime 8 mg/kg once daily. The most frequently reported adverse effects associated with cefprozil, diarrhoea and nausea, are usually mild to moderate in severity and discontinuation of treatment is rarely necessary. Thus, cefprozil with its convenient administration regimen appears to be a suitable alternative to cefaclor, cefixime, amoxicillin/clavulanate or erythromycin for the treatment of upper and lower respiratory tract infections, skin and skin-structure infections, and otitis media in children. While cefprozil has shown similar efficacy to cefaclor in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections, well-controlled clinical trials comparing its efficacy with that of cotrimoxazole (trimethoprim+sulfamethoxazole) in this indication are required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 7681376     DOI: 10.2165/00003495-199345020-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drugs        ISSN: 0012-6667            Impact factor:   9.546


  40 in total

1.  Alternative antimicrobial agents to contemporary treatment of infections caused by Corynebacterium parvum (Propionibacterium acnes)

Authors:  J L Croco; R N Jones
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 5.790

2.  Phase I study of multiple-dose cefprozil and comparison with cefaclor.

Authors:  R H Barbhaiya; U A Shukla; C R Gleason; W C Shyu; R B Wilber; R R Martin; K A Pittman
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  In vitro activity and beta-lactamase stability of the oral cephalosporin BMY-28100.

Authors:  M Hiraoka; S Masuyoshi; K Tomatsu; M Inoue; S Mitsuhashi
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.267

4.  Comparative antibacterial activity of a new oral cephalosporin, BMY-28100.

Authors:  N X Chin; H C Neu
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  In vitro activity of BMY 28100, a new oral cephalosporin.

Authors:  J Steele; B Edwards; J Rissing
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 3.267

6.  Cefprozil versus cefaclor in the treatment of acute and uncomplicated urinary tract infections. Cefprozil Multicenter Study Group.

Authors:  A Iravani; C A Doyle; S J Durham; R B Wilber
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  1992 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.393

Review 7.  Pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of cefprozil.

Authors:  S L Barriere
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 9.079

8.  Comparative efficacy and safety of cefprozil (BMY-28100) and cefaclor in the treatment of acute group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal pharyngitis.

Authors:  J C Christenson; E Swenson; W M Gooch; J N Herrod
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Antibacterial activity of cefpodoxime in comparison with cefixime, cefdinir, cefetamet, ceftibuten, loracarbef, cefprozil, BAY 3522, cefuroxime, cefaclor and cefadroxil.

Authors:  A Bauernfeind; R Jungwirth
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1991 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.553

10.  BMY-28100, a new oral cephalosporin: antimicrobial activity against nearly 7,000 recent clinical isolates, comparative potency with other oral agents, and activity against beta-lactamase producing isolates.

Authors:  R N Jones; A L Barry
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 2.803

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Clinical and economic considerations in the use of third-generation oral cephalosporins.

Authors:  S T Chambers; D R Murdoch; M J Pearce
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Evidence-based well-baby care. Part 1: Overview of the next generation of the Rourke Baby Record.

Authors:  L Panagiotou; L L Rourke; J T Rourke; J G Wakefield; D Winfield
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Once-daily oral gatifloxacin versus oral levofloxacin in treatment of uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infections: double-blind, multicenter, randomized study.

Authors:  G A Tarshis; B M Miskin; T M Jones; J Champlin; K J Wingert; J D Breen; M J Brown
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 4.  Cefprozil: a review.

Authors:  Sumit Bhargava; Rakesh Lodha; S K Kabra
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 1.967

5.  Efficacy and tolerability assessment of cefprozil in children with acute otitis media.

Authors:  Nomeeta Gupta; Vivek Bagga; Bharat J Parmar; Kishaloy Kar; Abhijit Mukherjee; Sandip Mehta; Ashok K Moharana
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 1.967

6.  Pediatric tonsillopharyngitis--an evaluation of cefprozil in Indian patients.

Authors:  Nomeeta Gupta; Abhijit Mukherjee; A K Moharana
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 1.967

Review 7.  Redefining the management of pediatric tonsillopharyngitis with cefprozil.

Authors:  Nameet Jerath; Ganesh Shetty
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.967

8.  Cefprozil versus Cefuroxime Axetil in the Treatment of Acute Sinusitis.

Authors:  E R Brankston; H S Conter; R Corriveau; J M Martel; C Laroche; R Roy; C Savard; D Roy; R Kelly; P Forget; M Rivard; F Boulerice
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.859

9.  In Vitro Activity of Oral Cephalosporins (Cefprozil and Cefixime) Against Ciprofloxacin-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae from Community-Acquired Urinary-Tract Infections.

Authors:  Aikaterini Pistiki; Thomas Tsaganos; Irene Galani; Evangelos J Giamarellos-Bourboulis
Journal:  Infect Dis Ther       Date:  2015-09-21

10.  Pharmacokinetic comparison with different assays for simultaneous determination of cis-, trans-cefprozil diastereomers in human plasma.

Authors:  Seung-Hyun Jeong; Ji-Hun Jang; Hea-Young Cho; Yong-Bok Lee
Journal:  J Pharm Anal       Date:  2020-07-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.