Pharmacodynamics of Antimicrobial Agents and Rationale for Their Dosing

REFERENCES

• Garraffo R. Optimal adaptive control of pharmacodynamic effects with aminoglycoside antibiotics: a required approach for the future. Int J Biomed Comput 1994; 36: 43-57.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MacGowan AP. Concentration controlled and concentration defined clinical trials: do they offer any advantages for antimicrobial chemotherapy? J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 37: 1-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah PM., Ghahremani M, Corres F-J et al. Bactericidal activity of antimicrobials in the dynamic kill-curve model. J Drug Dev 1988; 1 (Suppl 3): 35-47.
   Google Scholar
• Sous FI, Hirsch I. Bactericidal activity of phenoxymethyl-penicillin in an in vitro model simulating tissue kinetics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 15 (Suppl A); 233-239.
   Google Scholar
• Hyatt JM, Nix DE, Stratton CW, Schentag JJ. In vitro pharmacodynamics of piperacillin, piperacillin-tazobactam and ciprofloxacin alone and in combination against Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterobacter cloacae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 1711-1716.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Odenholt-Tornquist I. Pharmacodynamics of beta-lactam antibiotics. Scand J Infect Dis 1989, Suppl 58.
   Google Scholar
• Craig WA, Ebert SC. Continuous infusion of ß-lactam antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 2577-2583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bundtzen RW, Gerber AU, Cohn DL, Craig WA. Post antibiotic suppression of bacterial growth. Rev Infect Dis 1981; 3: 28-37.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sande MA, Korzeniowski OM, Allegro GM, Brennan RO, Zak O, Scheid WM. Intermittent and continuous therapy of experimental meningitis due to Streptococcus pneumoniae in rabbits: preliminary observations on the post antibiotic effect in vivo. Rev Infect Dis 1981; 3: 98-109.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McDonald PJ, Wetherall BL, Pruul H. Post antibiotic leukocyte enhancement: increased susceptibility of bacteria pre treated with antibiotics to activity of leukocytes. Rev Infect Dis 1981; 3: 38-44.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Odenholt I, Holm SE, Cars O. Effects of supra and sub MIC benzyl penicillin concentrations on Group A ß-haemolytic streptococci during the post antibiotic phase in vivo. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 26: 193-201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oshida T, Onta T, Nakanishi N, Matsushita T, Yamaguchi T. Activity of sub-minimal inhibitory concentrations of aspoxicillin in prolonging the post antibiotic effect against Staphylococcus aureus. I Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 26: 29-38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones EM, MacGowan AP. The antimicrobial chemotherapy of human infection due to Listeria monocytogenes. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1995; 14: 165-175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Asselt GJ, Mouton RP, van Boven CPA. Penicillin tolerance and treatment failure in Group A streptococcal pharyngotonsillitis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1996; 15: 107-115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuomanen E, Durack DT, Tomasz A. Antibiotic tolerance among clinical isolates of bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1986; 30 521-527.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James PA. Comparison of four methods for determination of MIC and MBC of penicillin for viridans streptococci and implications for penicillin tolerance. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 25: 209-216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White CA, Toothaker RD. Influence of ampicillin half-life on in vitro bacterial effect. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (Suppl A): 257-260.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thaurin C, Eliopoulos GM, Willey S, Wennersten C, Moellering RC. Continuous-infusion ampicillin therapy of enterococcal endocarditis in rats. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987; 31: 139-143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelman B, Gudmundsson S, Leggett J, Turnidge J, Ebert S, Craig WA. Correlation of antimicrobial pharmacokinetic parameters with therapeutic efficacy in an animal model. J Infect Dis 1988; 158: 831-847.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinstein MP, Stratton CW, Ackley A, et al. Multicenter collaborative evaluation of a standardised serum bactericidal test as a prognostic indicator in infective endocarditis. Am J Med 1985; 78: 262-269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinstein MP, Stratton CW, Hawley HB, Ackley A, Relier LB. Multicenter collaborative evaluation of a standardised serum bactericidal test as a predictor of therapeutic efficacy in acute and chronic oesteomyelitis. Am J Med 1987; 83: 218-222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones BL, Ludlam HA, Brown DFJ. High dose ampicillin for the treatment of high level aminoglycoside resistant enterococcal endocarditis. J Antimicrob Chemother 1994; 33: 891-892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Körner RJ, Nicol A, Reeves DS, MacGowan AP, Hows J. Ciprofloxacin resistant Serratia marcescens endocarditis as a complication of non-Hodgkins lymphoma. J Infect 1994; 29: 73-76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelman BS, Craig WA. Post antibiotic effects. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (Suppl A): 37-46.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Craig WA, Ebert SC. Killing and regrowth of bacteria in vitro: a review. Scand J Infect Dis 1991; Suppl 74: 63-70.
   Google Scholar
• Leggett JE, Fantin B, Ebert S, et al. Comparative antibiotic dose-effect relations at several dosing intervals in murine pneumonitis and thigh-infection models. J Infect Dis 1989; 159: 281-292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roosendaal R, Bakker-Woudenberg AJ, van den Berghe-van Raffe M, Vink-van den Berg JC, Michel MF. Impact of the dosage schedule on the efficacy of ceftazidime, gentamicin and ciprofloxacin in Klebsiella pneumoniae pneumonia and septicaemia in leukopenic rats. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1989; 8: 878-887.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mouton JW, den Hollander JG. Killing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa during continuous and intermittent infusion of ceftazidime in an in vitro pharmacokinetic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 931-936.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cappelletty DM, Kang SL, Palmer SM, Rybak MJ. Pharmacodynamics of ceftazidime administered as continuous infusion or intermittent bolus alone and in combination with single daily dose amikacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in an in vitro infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 33: 1797-1801.
   Google Scholar
• Garrison MW, Malone CL, Eiland JE. Activity of once daily cefpodoxime regimens against Haemophilus influenzae and Streptococcus pneumoniae with an in vitro pharmacodynamic chamber model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996; 40: 1545-1547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mouton JW, Horrevorts AM, Mulder PGH, Prens EP, Michel MF. Pharmacokinetics of ceftazidime in serum and suction blister fluid during continuous and intermittent infusions in health volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 2307-2311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daenen S, Erjavec Z, Uges DRA, De Vries-Hospers MG, De Jonge P, Halie MR. Continuous infusion of ceftazidime in febrile neutropenic patients with acute myeloid leukaemia. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1995; 14: 188-192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benko AS, Cappelletty DM, Kruse JA, Rybak MJ. Continuous infusion versus intermittent administration of ceftazidime in critically ill patients with suspected Gram-negative infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996; 40: 691-695.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolau DP, Nightingale CH, Benevicius MA, Feu Q, Quintiliani R. Serum bactericidal activity of ceftazidime: continuous infusion versus intermittent injection. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 1996; 40: 61-64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daenen S, de Vries-Hospers H. Cure of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in neutropenic patients by continuous infusion of ceftazidime. Lancet 1988; i:937.
   Google Scholar
• David TJ, Devlin J. Continuous infusion of ceftazidime in cystic fibrosis. Lancet 1989; i: 1454.
   Google Scholar
• Kuzemko J, Crawford C. Continuous infusion of ceftazidime in cystic fibrosis. Lancet 1989; ii: 385.
   Google Scholar
• Bodey GP, Ketchel SJ, Rodriguez V. A randomised study of carbenicillin plus cefamandole or tobramycin in treatment of febrile episodes in cancer patients. Am J Med 1979; 67: 608-616.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schentag JJ. Correlation of pharmacokinetic parameters to efficacy of antibiotics: relationship between serum concentrations, MIC values and bacterial eradication in patients with Gram-negative pneumonia. Scand J Infect Dis 1991; Suppl 74: 218-234.
   Google Scholar
• Goss T, Forrest A, Nix DE, Ballow CH, Birmingham MC, Cumbo TJ, Schentag JJ. Mathematical examination of dual individualisation principles (II): the rate of bactericidal eradication at the same area under the inhibitory curve is more rapid for ciprofloxacin than for cefmenoxime. Ann Pharmacother 1994; 28: 863-868.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGrath BJ, Marchbanks CR, Gilbert D, Dudley MN. In vitro post antibiotic effect following repeated exposure to imipenem, temafloxacin and tobramycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 1723-1725.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuentes F, Martin MM, Izquierdo J, Gomez-Lus ML, Prieto J. In vivo and in vitro study of several pharmacodynamic effects of meropenem. Scand J Infect Dis 1995; 27: 469-474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanberger H, Nilsson LE, Nilsson M, Maller R. Post antibiotic effect of beta-lactams antibiotics on Gram-negative bcteria in relation to morphology, initial killing and MIC. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1991; 10, 11: 927-934.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Odenholt-Tornquist I. Studies the post antibiotic effect and the post antibiotic sub MIC effect of meropenem. J Antimicrob Chemother 1993; 31: 881-892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackenzie FM, Gould IM, Chapman DG, Jason D. Post antibiotic effect of meropenem on members of the family Enterobacteriaceae determined by five methods. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38, 11: 2583-2589.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrara A, Grassi G, Grassi F, Piccioni PD, Gialdroni Grassi G. Bactericidal of meropenem and interactions with other antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1989; 24: (Suppl A) 239-250.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• White R, Friedrich L, Burgess D, Warburton D, Bosso J. Comparative in vitro pharmacodynamics of imipenem and meropenem against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996; 40: 904-908.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowker KE, Holt HA, Reeves DS, MacGowan AP. Bactericidal activity, post antibiotic effect and modified controlled effective regrowth time of meropenem at high concentrations. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 38: 1055-1059.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maggiola F, Taras A, Frontespezi S, Boltari F, Legnani MC, Suter F. Bactericidal activity of two different dosage regimes of imipenem in an in vitro dynamic model. J Antimicrob Chemother 1993; 32: 295-300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fluckiger V, Segessenman C, Gerber AV. Integration of pharmacoeconomics and pharmacodynamics of imipenem in a human adapted mouse model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35: 1905-1910.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards JR. Meropenem: a microbiological overview. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 36: Suppl A, 1-17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson LE, Nilsson M, Jendle J. Sub populations of variants resistant to imipenem in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother 1998; 22: 643-649.
   Google Scholar
• Walker R, Andes D, Cinklin R, Ebert SC, Craig W. Pharmacodynamic activities in an animal infection model. 34th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, American Society for Microbiology, Washington DC: 1994, Abstr A91.
   Google Scholar
• Romanelli G, Cravarezza P, and the Italian Intramuscular Meropenem Study Group. Intramuscular meropenem in the treatment of bacterial infections of the urinary and lower respiratory tracts. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; Suppl A: 109-119.
   Google Scholar
• MacGowan AP, Bowker KE, Lovering AM, Brown IM, Darley ESR, Reeves DS, Harvey JE. Once-a-day carbapenem therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 38: 327-328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang SL, Rybank MJ, McGrath BJ, Kaatz GW, Seo SM. Pharmacodynamics of levofloxacin, ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin alone and in combination with rifampicin against methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 2702-2709.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackenzie FM, Gould IM. The post antibiotic effect. J Antimicrob Chemother 1993; 32: 519-537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiedemann B, Kratz B. The post antibiotic effect of ciprofloxacin. In: Ciprofloxacin iv defining its role in serious infections. Ed: Carrard C. Springer-Verlag, London 1994: 11-19.
   Google Scholar
• Bauernfeind A, Kljucar S. Dose-finding investigations of intravenous ciprofloxacin in a pharmacodynamic model. In: Ciprofloxacin iv defining its role in serious infections. Ed: Garrard C. Springer-Verlag, London 1994; 39-48.
   Google Scholar
• Reeves DS. Advantages and disadvantages of an in vitro model with two compartments connected by a dialysiser results of experiments with ciprofloxacin. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15, Suppl A: 159-167.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blaser J, Stone BB, Groner MC, Zinner SH. 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. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987; 31: 1054-1060.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drusano GL, Johnson DE, Rosen M, Standford HC. Pharmacodynamics of a fluoroquinolone antimicrobial agent in a neutropenic rat model of Pseudomonas sepsis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 483-490.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan MC, Cooper BW, Nightingale CM, Quintiliani R, Lawlor MT. Evaluation of the efficacy of ciprofloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae by using a mouse protection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 234-239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forrest A, Nix DE, Ballow CH, Goss TF, Birmingham MC, Schentag JJ. Pharmacodynamics of intravenous ciprofloxacin in seriously ill patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37; 1073-1081.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanberger H, Nilsson LE, Mailer R, Isaksson B. Pharmacodynamics of daptomycin and vancomycin on Enterococcus faecalis and Staphylococcus aureus. Demonstrated by studies of initial killing and post antibiotic effect and influence of Ca2+ and albumin on these drugs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35; 1710-1716.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey EM, Rybak MJ, Kaatz GW. Comparative effect of protein binding on the killing activities of teicoplanin and vancomycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35: 1089-1092.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ackerman BH, Vannier AM, Eudy EB. Analysis of vancomycin time kill studies with Staphylococcus species by using a curve stripping program to describe the relationship between concentration and pharmacodynamic response. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 1766-1769.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Contrepois A, Joly V, Abel L, Pangon B, Vallois HM, Carbon C. The pharmacokinetics and extravascular diffusion of teicoplanin in rabbits and comparative efficacy with vancomycin in an experimental endocarditis mode. J Antimicrob Chemother 1988; 21: 621-631.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers HF, Kennedy S. Effects of dosage, peak and trough concentrations in serum, protein binding and bactericidal rate on efficacy of teicoplanin in a rabbit model of endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 510-514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson APR, Gruneberg RN, Neu H. A critical review of the dosage of teicoplanin in Europe and the USA. Int J Antimicrob Agents 1994; 4 (Suppl 4): S1-S30.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leport C, Perronne C, Massip P, et al. Evaluation of teicoplanin for treatment of endocarditis caused by Gram-positive cocci in 20 patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989; 33: 871-876.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacGowan AP, White LO, Flarding I, Reeves DS. A retrospective review of serum teicoplanin concentration in clinical trials and their relationship to clinical outcome. J Infect Chemother (in press).
   Google Scholar
• Jackson GG, Daikos GL, Lolans VT. First-exposure effect of netilmicin on bacterial susceptibility as a basis for modifying the dosage regimen of aminoglycoside antibiotics. J Drug Dev 1988; 1 (Suppl 3): 49-54.
   Google Scholar
• Daikos GL, Jackson GG, Lolans VT, Livermore DM. Adaptive resistance to aminoglycoside antibiotics from first-exposure down-regulation. J Infect Dis 1990; 162: 414-420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blaser J. Efficacy of once-and thrice-daily dosing of aminoglycosides in in vitro models of infection. J Antimicrob Chemother 1991; 27 (Suppl C); 21-28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Begg EJ, Peddie BA, Chambers ST, Boswell DR, Comparison of gentamicin dosing regimens using an in vitro model. J Antimicrob Chemother 1992; 29: 427-433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell SFI, Thompson WL, Luthe MA, et al. Once-daily vs continuous aminoglycoside dosing, efficacy and toxicity in animal and clinical studies of gentamicin, netilmicin and tobramycin. J Infect Dis 1983; 147: 918-932.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig WA, Redington J, Ebert SC. Pharmacodynamics of amikacin in vitro and in mouse thigh and lung infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 1991; 27 (Suppl C): 29-40.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Preston SL, Briceland LL. Single daily dosing of aminoglycosides. Pharmacotherapy 1995; 15: 297-316.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blaser J, König C. Once daily dosing of aminoglycosides. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1995; 14: 1029-1038.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barza M, Ionnidis JPA, Cappelleri JC, Lau J. Single or multiple daily doses of aminoglycosides: a meta-analysis. Br Med J 1996; 312: 338-345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatala R, Dinh T, Cook DJ. Once-daily aminoglycoside dosing in immunocompetent adults: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 1996; 124: 717-725.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munckhof WJ, Grayson ML, Turnidge JD. A metaanalysis of studies on the safety and efficacy of aminoglycosides given either once daily or as divided doses. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 37: 645-663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferriols-Lisart R, Alos-Alminana M. Effectiveness and safety of once-daily aminoglycosides: a meta analysis. Am J Hcalth-Syst Pharm 1996; 53: 1141-1150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prins JM, Buller HR. Meta-analysis: the final answer, or even more confusion. Lancet 1996; 348: 199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolau DP, Freeman CD, Belliveau PB, Nightingale CH, Ross JW, Quintiliani R. Experience with a one-daily aminoglycoside program administered to 2184 adult patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 650-655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacGowan AP, Reeves DS. Serum monitoring of once-daily aminoglycoside dosing. J Antimicrob Chemother 1994; 33: 349-350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ettlinger JJ, Bedford KA, Lovering AM, Reeves DS, Speidel BD, MacGowan AP. Pharmacokinetics of once-a-day netilmicin (6 mg/kg) in neonates, J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 38: 499-505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang SL, Rybak MJ. Pharmacodynamics of RP 59500 alone and in combination with vancomycin against Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro-infected fibrin model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 1505-1511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauernfeind A, Jungwirth R, Ebertein E. Comparative pharmacodynamics of clarithromycin and azithromycin against respiratory pathogens. Infection 1995; 23: 66-71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar