Pharmacodynamics of Simulated Total Versus Free-Drug Serum Concentrations of a Low Versus a High Protein Bound Third-Generation Oral Cephalosporin (Cefpodoxime Versus Cefditoren) Against Streptococcus pneumoniae

References

• Pottumarthy S, Fritsche TR, Jones RN. Comparative activity of oral and parenteral cephalosporins tested against multidrug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae: report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (1997-2003). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2005; 51: 147–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perez-Trallero E, Garcia-de-la-Fuente C, Garcia-Rey C et al. Geographical and ecological analysis of resistance, coresis-tance, and coupled resistance to antimicrobials in respiratory pathogenic bacteria in Spain. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 1965–1972.
   Google Scholar
• Prieto J, Calvo A, G6mez-Lus ML. Antimicrobial resis-tance: a class effect?. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 50 (Suppl S2): 7–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones ME, Blosser-Middleton RS, Thornsberry C, Karlowsky JA, Sahm DF. The activity of levofloxacin and other antimicrobials against clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae collected worldwide during 1999-2002. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2003; 47: 579–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perez-Trallero E, Fernandez-Mazarrasa C, Garcia-Rey C et al. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of 1,684 Streptococcus pneumoniae and 2,039 Streptococcus pyogenes isolates and their ecological relationships: results of a 1-year (1998-1999) multicenter surveillance study in Spain. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001; 45: 3334–3340.
   Google Scholar
• Pallares R, Fenoll A, Litiares J; The Spanish Pneumococcal Infection Study Network. The epidemiology of antibiotic resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae and the clinical relevance of resistance to cephalosporins, macrolides and quinolones. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2003; 22 (Suppl 1): S15-24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cha R, Rybak MJ. Influence of protein binding under controlled conditions on the bactericidal activity of daptomycin in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 54: 259–262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer SM, Kang SL, Cappelletty DM, Rybak MJ. Bactericidal killing activities of cefepime, ceftazidime, cefo-taxime, and ceftriaxone against Staphylococcus aureus and beta-lactamase-producing strains of Enterobacter aerogenes and Klebsiella pneumoniae in an in vitro infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 1764–1771.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blandino G, Milazzo I, Musumeci R, Nicolosi VM, Speciale A, Nicoletti G. Comparative activity of cefodizime and ceftriaxone against respiratory pathogens in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model simulating concentration-time curves. J Chemother 2000; 12: 503–508.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute/NCCLS. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; fifteenth informational supplement. CLSI/NCCLS document M100-515. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA, USA, 2005
   Google Scholar
• Bonn MT, Hughes GS, Spillers CR, Patel RK. Pharmacokinetics of cefpodoxime in plasma and skin blister fluid following oral dosing of cefpodoxime proxetil. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 1094–1099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonin MT, Hughes GS, Patel RK, Royer ME, Cathcart KS. Pharmacokinetic and tolerance studies of cefpodoxime after single- and multiple-dose oral administration of cefpo-doxime proxetil. J Clin Pharmacol 1991; 31: 1137–1145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saathoff N, Lode H, Neider K, Depperman KM, Borner K, Koeppe P. Pharmacokinetics of cefpodoxime prox-etil and interactions with an antacid and an H2 receptor antagonist. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 796–800.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tremblay D, Dupront A, Ho C, Coussediere D, Lenfant B. Pharmacokinetics of cefpodoxime in young and elderly volunteers after single doses. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 26 (Suppl E):21-28.
   Google Scholar
• Mulford D, Mayer M, Witt G. Effect of age and gender on the pharmacokinetics of cefditoren (poster 311). 40th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 2000 Sep 17-20; Toronto
   Google Scholar
• Mulford D, Mayer M, Witt G. Effect of renal impair-ment on the pharmacokinetic of cefditoren (poster 311). 40th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 2000 Sept 17-20; Toronto
   Google Scholar
• Bonin MT. A review of the pharmacokinetics of cefpo-doxime proxetil. Drugs 1991; 42 (Suppl. 3): 13-21.
   Google Scholar
• Craig WA, Andes DR. In vivo pharmacodynamic activi-ty of cefditoren against Streptococcus pneumoniae. 41st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; Dec 16-19; Chicago 2001
   Google Scholar
• Sevillano D, Calvo A, Gimenez MJ et al. Bactericidal activity of amoxicillin against non-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model simulat-ing the concentrations obtained with the 2000/125 mg sus-tained-release co-amoxiclav formulation. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 54: 1148–1151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews JM. Microbiological assays. In: Reeves DS, Wise R, Andrews JM, et al., eds. Clinical Antimicrobial Assays. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1999: 35–44.
   Google Scholar
• O'Neill P, Nye K, Douce G, Andrews J, Wise R. Pharmacokinetics and inflammatory fluid penetration of cefpo-doxime proxetil in volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 232–234
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fenoll A, Robledo 0, Lerma M et al. Actividad de la cefpodoxima y otros I3-lactámicos orales frente a Haemophilus influenzae y Streptococcus pneumoniae con diferente grado de susceptibilidad a penicilina. Rev Esp Quimioter 2006; 19: 39–44.
   Google Scholar
• Soriano F, Granizo JJ, Fenoll A et al. Antimicrobial resistance among clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoni-ae isolated in four southern European countries (ARISE pro-ject) from adult patients: results from the cefditoren surveil-lance program. J Chemother 2003; 15: 107–112.
   Google Scholar
• Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute/NCCLS. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; fifteenth informational supplement. CLSI/NCCLS document M100-515. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA, USA, 2005
   Google Scholar
• MEIACT data sheet. http://sinaem.agemed.es:83/pre-sentacion/principal.asp
   Google Scholar
• Gimenez MJ, G6mez-Lus ML, Valdes L, Aguilar L. Situaci6n de la cefalosporina oral de tercera generaci6n cefdi-toreno pivoxil en el tratamiento de la infeccinn comunitaria del adulto. Rev Espanol Quimioter 2005; 18: 210–216.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fenoll A, Casal J, Robledo 0, Aguilar L, Gimenez MJ. In vitro activity of cefditoren against penicillin, amoxicillin, cefuroxime, azithromycin or levofloxacin non-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae strains. Int J Infect Dis 2006; 10 (Suppl. 1): S238.
   Google Scholar
• Boswell FJ, Ashby JP, Andrews JM, Wise R. Effect of protein binding on the in vitro activity and pharmacodynamics of faropenem. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 50: 525–532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azoulay-Dupuis E, Moine P, Bedos JP, Rieux V, Vallee E. Amoxicillin dose-effect relationship with Streptococcus pneumoniae in a mouse pneumonia model and roles of in vitro penicillin susceptibilities, autolysis, and tolerance proper-ties of the strains. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996; 40: 941–946.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright JD, Boudinot FD, Ujhelyi MR. Measurement and analysis of unbound drug concentrations. Clin Pharmacokinet 1996; 30: 445–462.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang V, Rybak MJ. Evaluation of daptomycin activity against Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro pharmacody-namic model under normal and simulated impaired renal func-tion. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006; 57: 116–121.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhanel CC, Johanson C, Laing N, Hisanaga T, Wierzbowski A, Hoban DJ. Pharmacodynamic activity of telithromycin at simulated clinically achievable free-drug con-centrations in serum and epithelial lining fluid against efflux (mefE)-producing macrolide-resistant Streptococcus pneumo-niae for which telithromycin MICs vary. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 1943–1948.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhanel CC, DeCorby M, Noreddin A, Mendoza C, Cumming A, Nichol K, Wierzbowski A, Hoban DJ. Pharmacodynamic activity of azithromycin against macrolide-susceptible and -resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae simulat-ing clinically achievable free serum, epithelial lining fluid and middle ear fluid concentrations. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003; 52: 83–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noreddin AM, Roberts D, Nichol K, Wierzbowski A, Hoban DJ, Zhanel CC. Pharmacodynamic modeling of clar-ithromycin against macrolide-resistant [PCR-positive mef(A) or erm(B)] Streptococcus pneumoniae simulating clinically achievable serum and epithelial lining fluid free-drug concen-trations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 4029–4034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhanel CC, Johanson C, Hisanaga T, et al. Pharmacodynamic activity of telithromycin against macrolide-susceptible and macrolide-resistant Streptococcus pneumoni-ae simulating clinically achievable free serum and epithelial lin-ing fluid concentrations. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 54: 1072–1077.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar