Literature DB >> 8851583

Twenty-four-hour area under the concentration-time curve/MIC ratio as a generic predictor of fluoroquinolone antimicrobial effect by using three strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and an in vitro pharmacodynamic model.

K J Madaras-Kelly1, B E Ostergaard, L B Hovde, J C Rotschafer.   

Abstract

Several investigators have suggested that the 24-h area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)/MIC ratio (AUC/MIC24 or AUIC24) can be used to make comparisons of antimicrobial activity between fluoroquinolone antibiotics. Limited data exist regarding the generic predictive ability of AUC/MIC24 for the antimicrobial effects of fluoroquinolones. The purposes of the present investigation were to determine if the AUC/MIC24 can be used as a generic outcome predictor of fluoroquinolone antibacterial activity and to determine if a similar AUC/MIC24 breakpoint can be established for different fluoroquinolones. Using an in vitro pharmacodynamic model, 29 duplicate concentration time-kill curve experiments simulated AUC/MIC24s ranging from 52 to 508 SIT-1.h (inverse serum inhibitory titer integrated over time) with ciprofloxacin or ofloxacin against three strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Each 24-h experiment was performed in cation-supplemented Mueller-Hinton broth with a starting inoculum of 10(6) CFU/ml. At timed intervals cation-supplemented Mueller-Hinton broth samples were collected for CFU and fluoroquinolone concentration determinations. Transformation of bacterial counts into the cumulative bacterial effect parameter of the 24-h area under the effect curve (AUEC24) was performed for each concentration time-kill curve. Multivariate regression analysis was used to compare pharmacodynamic predictors (AUC/MIC24, 24-h AUC, peak concentration [Cmax] to MIC ratios [Cmax:MIC], etc.) with ln AUEC24. To identify threshold breakpoint AUC/MIC24s, AUEC24s were stratified by the magnitude of AUC/MIC24 into subgroups, which were analyzed for differences in antibacterial effect. The Kruskal-Wallis test and subsequent Tukey's multiple comparison test were used to determine which AUC/MIC subgroups were significantly different. Multiple regression analysis revealed that only AUC/MIC24 (r2 = 0.65) and MIC (r2 = 0.03) were significantly correlated with antibacterial effect. At similar AUC/MIC24s, yet different MICs, Cmaxs, or elimination half-lives, the AUEC24s were similar for both fluoroquinolones. The relationship between AUC/MIC24 and ln AUEC24 was best described by a sigmoidal maximal antimicrobial effect (Emax) model (r2 = 0.72; Emax = 9.1; AUC/MIC50 = 119 SIT-1.h; S = 2.01 [S is an exponent that reflects the degree of sigmoidicity]). Ciprofloxacin-bacteria AUC/MIC24 values of < 100 SIT-1.h were significantly different (P < 0.05) from the AUC/MIC24 values of > 100 SIT-1.h. An ofloxacin AUC/MIC24 of > 100 SIT-1.h and an AUC/MIC24 of < 100 SIT-1.h exhibited a trend toward a significant difference (P > 0.05 but < 0.1). The inverse relationship between drug exposure and MIC increase postexposure was described by a sigmoidal fixed Emax model (AUC/MIC24, r2 = 0.40; AUC/MIC50 = 95 SIT-1.h; S = 1.97; Cmax:MIC, r2 = 0.41; Cmax:MIC50 = 7.3; S = 2.01). These data suggest that AUC/MIC24 may be the most descriptive measurement of fluoroquinolone antimicrobial activity against P. aeruginosa, that ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin have similar AUC/MIC24 threshold breakpoints at approximately 100 SIT-1.h, that the concentration-dependent selection of resistant organisms may parallel the threshold breakpoint of the antimicrobial effect, and that AUC/MIC24 generically describes the antibacterial effects of different fluoroquinolones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8851583      PMCID: PMC163170     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  16 in total

1.  [Dependence of the bactericidal activity and mutant selection of 4-quinolones on their serum concentration levels].

Authors:  A Bauernfeind; C Petermüller; B Heinrich; R Gablac
Journal:  Infection       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 3.553

2.  Artifacts in dilution pharmacokinetic models caused by adherent bacteria.

Authors:  R Haag; P Lexa; I Werkhäuser
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1986-05       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Comparative study with enoxacin and netilmicin in a pharmacodynamic model to determine importance of ratio of antibiotic peak concentration to MIC for bactericidal activity and emergence of resistance.

Authors:  J Blaser; B B Stone; M C Groner; S H Zinner
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1987-07       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Evaluation of intravenous ciprofloxacin in patients with nosocomial lower respiratory tract infections. Impact of plasma concentrations, organism, minimum inhibitory concentration, and clinical condition on bacterial eradication.

Authors:  C A Peloquin; T J Cumbo; D E Nix; M F Sands; J J Schentag
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1989-10

5.  Comparative dose-effect relations at several dosing intervals for beta-lactam, aminoglycoside and quinolone antibiotics against gram-negative bacilli in murine thigh-infection and pneumonitis models.

Authors:  J E Leggett; S Ebert; B Fantin; W A Craig
Journal:  Scand J Infect Dis Suppl       Date:  1990

6.  Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic activities of ciprofloxacin against strains of Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa for which MICs are similar.

Authors:  J M Hyatt; D E Nix; J J Schentag
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Kinetic model for gentamicin dosing with the use of individual patient parameters.

Authors:  R J Sawchuk; D E Zaske; R J Cipolle; W A Wargin; R G Strate
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 6.875

8.  Time-survival studies for quantifying effects of azlocillin and tobramycin on Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  M M McFarland; E M Scott; A Li Wan Po
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Purulent pericarditis caused by Candida: report of three cases and identification of high-risk populations as an aid to early diagnosis.

Authors:  W E Kraus; P N Valenstein; G R Corey
Journal:  Rev Infect Dis       Date:  1988 Jan-Feb

10.  Evaluation of activity of temafloxacin against Bacteroides fragilis by an in vitro pharmacodynamic system.

Authors:  R A Zabinski; K Vance-Bryan; A J Krinke; K J Walker; J A Moody; J C Rotschafer
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  39 in total

1.  Activity of moxifloxacin, administered once a day, against Streptococcus pneumoniae in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model of infection.

Authors:  A P MacGowan; K E Bowker; M Wootton; H A Holt
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 2.  Achieving an optimal outcome in the treatment of infections. The role of clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antimicrobials.

Authors:  R C Li; M Zhu; J J Schentag
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 6.447

3.  Use of Modeling Techniques to Aid in Antibiotic Selection.

Authors:  Alexander A. Firsov; Stephen H. Zinner
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.725

4.  Pharmacodynamic functions: a multiparameter approach to the design of antibiotic treatment regimens.

Authors:  Roland R Regoes; Camilla Wiuff; Renata M Zappala; Kim N Garner; Fernando Baquero; Bruce R Levin
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Levofloxacin pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in patients with severe burn injury.

Authors:  Tyree H Kiser; Dorie W Hoody; Marilee D Obritsch; Colleen O Wegzyn; Paulus C Bauling; Douglas N Fish
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.191

6.  Pharmacodynamics of trovafloxacin and levofloxacin against Bacteroides fragilis in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model.

Authors:  M L Peterson; L B Hovde; D H Wright; G H Brown; A D Hoang; J C Rotschafer
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Comparisons between antimicrobial pharmacodynamic indices and bacterial killing as described by using the Zhi model.

Authors:  S Corvaisier; P H Maire; M Y Bouvier d'Yvoire; X Barbaut; N Bleyzac; R W Jelliffe
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Effect of differences in MIC values on clinical outcomes in patients with bloodstream infections caused by gram-negative organisms treated with levofloxacin.

Authors:  Robyn Defife; Marc H Scheetz; Joe M Feinglass; Michael J Postelnick; Kimberly K Scarsi
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  Ciprofloxacin in polyethylene glycol-coated liposomes: efficacy in rat models of acute or chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection.

Authors:  Irma A J M Bakker-Woudenberg; Marian T ten Kate; Luke Guo; Peter Working; Johan W Mouton
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 5.191

10.  A new approach to in vitro comparisons of antibiotics in dynamic models: equivalent area under the curve/MIC breakpoints and equiefficient doses of trovafloxacin and ciprofloxacin against bacteria of similar susceptibilities.

Authors:  A A Firsov; S N Vostrov; A A Shevchenko; Y A Portnoy; S H Zinner
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.