Using Monte Carlo simulation to determine optimal dosing regimen for cefetamet sodium for injection

References

• Wise R, Andrews JM, Piddock LJ. In vitro activity of Ro 15-8074 and Ro 19-5247, two orally administered cephalosporin metabolites. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986;29:1067–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hohl P, Lfuthy-Hottenstein J, Zollinger-Iten J, Altwegg M. In vitro activities of fleroxacin, cefetamet, ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid against rare members of the family Enterobacteriaceae primarily of human (clinical) origin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990;34(8):1605–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neu HC, Chin NX, Labthavikul P. In vitro activity and beta-lactamase stability of two oral cephalosporins, ceftetrame (Ro 19–5247) and Cefetamet (Ro 15-8074). Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986;30:423–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheffer J, Knoller J, Cullmann W, Konig W. Effects of cefaclor, cefetamet and Ro40-6890 on inflammatory responses on human granulocytes. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1992;30:57–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheffer J, Knoller J, Cullmann W, Konig W. Effects of cefetamet and cefaclor on inflammatory responses of human granulocytes, basophils and rat mastcells. Med Mal Infect. 1992;22:548–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kissling M, Germano G, Fernex M. Cefetamet pivoxil a new oral cephalosporin: clinical evaluation. Chemotherapy. 1988;34:519–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam YK, Kneer J, Dubach UC, Stoeckel K. Pharmacokinetics of Cefetamet pivoxil (Ro 15-8075) with ascending oral doses in normal healthy volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989;33:957–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blouin RA, Stoeckel K. Cefetamet pivoxil clinical pharmacokinetics. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1993;25:172–88.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koup JR, Dubach UC, Brandt R, Wyss R, Stoeckel K. Pharmacokinetics of Cefetamet (Ro 15-8074) and Cefetamet pivoxil (Ro 15-8075) after intravenous and oral doses in humans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1988;32:573–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blouin RA, Kneer J, Stoeckel K. Pharmacokinetics of intravenous Cefetamet (Ro 15-8074) and oral Cefetamet pivoxil (Ro 15-8075) in young and elderly subjects. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989;33:291–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayton WL, Walstad RA, Thurmann-Nielsen E, Kufaas T, Kneer J, Ambros RJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics of intravenous Cefetamet and oral Cefetamet pivoxil in children. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991;35:720–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cullmann W, Edwards DJ, Kissling M, Kneer J, Stoeckel K, Urwyler H. Cefetamet pivoxil: a review of its microbiology, toxicology, pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 1992;1:175–91.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bryson HM, Brogden RN. Cefetamet pivoxil. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use. Drugs. 1993;45:589–621.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jun S. Integration of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in antibacterial drug development and pharmacotherapy. Chin J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007;12:1099–112.
   Google Scholar
• Kuti JL, Nightingale CH, Nicolau DP. Optimizing pharmacodynamic target attainment using the MYSTIC antibiogram: data collected in North America in 2002. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48:2464–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuti JL, Horowitz S, Nightingale CH, Nicolau DP. Comparison of pharmacodynamic target attainment between healthy subjects and patients for ceftazidime and meropenem. Pharmacotherapy. 2005;25:935–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masterton RG, Kuti JL, Turner PJ, Nicolau DP. The OPTAMA programme: utilizing MYSTIC (2002) to predict critical pharmacodynamic target attainment against nosocomial pathogens in Europe. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;55:71–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang H, Zhang B, Ni Y, Kuti JL, Chen B, Chen M, et al. Pharmacodynamic target attainment of seven antimicrobials against Gram-negative bacteria collected from China in 2003 and 2004. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2007;30:452–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasselmann C. European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) — European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) — Determination of minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) by agar dilution. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2000;6(5):1–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig WA. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice and men. Clin Infect Dis. 1998;26:1–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulitta JB, Duffull SB, Kinzig-Schippers M, Holzgrabe U, Stephan U, Drusano GL, et al. Systematic comparison of the population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of piperacillin in cystic fibrosis patients and healthy volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51:2497–507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambrose PG, Bhavnani SM, Rubino CM, Louie A, Gumbo T, Forrest A, et al. Pharmacokinetics–pharmacodynamics of antimicrobial therapy: it’s not just for mice anymore. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44:79–86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drusano GL. Antimicrobial pharmacodynamics: critical interactions of ‘bug and drug’. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004;2:289–300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li C, Kuti JL, Nightingale CH, Mansfield DL, Dana A, Nicolau DP. Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of piperacillin/tazobactam in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infection. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;56:388–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulitta JB, Landersdorfer CB, Hüttner SJ, Drusano GL, Kinzig M, Holzgrabe U, et al. Population pharmacokinetic comparison and pharmacodynamic breakpoints of ceftazidime in cystic fibrosis patients and healthy volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54:1275–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lomaestro BM, Drusano GL. Pharmacodynamic evaluation of extending the administration time of meropenem using a Monte Carlo simulation. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49:461–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krueger WA, Bulitta J, Kinzig-Schippers M, Landersdorfer C, Holzgrabe U, Naber KG, et al. Evaluation by monte carlo simulation of the pharmacokinetics of two doses of meropenem administered intermittently or as a continuous infusion in healthy volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2005;49:1881–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goutelle S, Bourguignon L, Maire PH, van Guilder M, Conte JE Jr, Jelliffe RW. Population modeling and Monte Carlo simulation study of the pharmacokinetics and antituberculosis pharmacodynamics of rifampin in lungs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53:2974–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Kim S, Quinney SK, Zhou J, Li L. Non-compartment model to compartment model pharmacokinetics transformation meta-analysis — a multivariate nonlinear mixed model. BMC Syst Biol. 2010;4(Suppl 1):S8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mouton JW, Dudley MN, Cars O, Derendorf H, Drusano GL. Standardization of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) terminology for anti-infective drugs: an update. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;55:601–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuti JL, Dandekar PK, Nightingale CH, Nicolau DP. Use of Monte Carlo simulation to design an optimized pharmacodynamic dosing strategy for meropenem. J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;43:1116–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frei CR, Wiederhold NP, Burgess DS.Antimicrobial breakpoints for Gram-negative aerobic bacteria based on pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models with Monte Carlo simulation. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;61:621–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wikler MA. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: twentieth informational supplement. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Sugihara K, Sugihara C, Matsushita Y, Yamamura N, Uemori M, Tokumitsu A, et al. In vivo pharmacodynamic activity of tomopenem (formerly CS-023) against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a murine thigh infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54:5298–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar