Back to Search
Start Over
Pharmacodynamics of telavancin studied in an in vitro pharmacokinetic model of infection.
- Source :
-
Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy [Antimicrob Agents Chemother] 2011 Feb; Vol. 55 (2), pp. 867-73. Date of Electronic Publication: 2010 Nov 15. - Publication Year :
- 2011
-
Abstract
- The antibacterial effects of telavancin, vancomycin, and teicoplanin against six Staphylococcus aureus strains (1 methicillin-susceptible S. aureus [MSSA] strain, 4 methicillin-resistant S. aureus [MRSA] strains, and 1 vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus [VISA] strain) and three Enterococcus sp. strains (1 Enterococcus faecalis strain, 1 Enterococcus faecium strain, and 1 vancomycin-resistant E. faecium [VREF] strain) were compared using an in vitro pharmacokinetic model of infection. Analyzing the data from all five vancomycin-susceptible S. aureus (VSSA) strains or all 4 MRSA strains showed that telavancin was superior in its antibacterial effect as measured by the area under the bacterial kill curve at 24 h (AUBKC(24)) and 48 h (AUBKC(48)) in comparison to vancomycin or teicoplanin (P < 0.05). Telavancin was also superior to vancomycin and teicoplanin in terms of its greater early killing effect (P < 0.05). Against the three Enterococcus spp. tested, telavancin was superior to vancomycin in terms of its AUBKC(24), AUBKC(48), and greater early bactericidal effect (P < 0.05). Dose-ranging studies were performed to provide free-drug area under the concentration-time curve over 24 h in the steady state divided by the MIC (fAUC/MIC) exposures from 0 to 1,617 (7 to 14 exposures per strain) for 5 VSSA, 4 VISA, and the 3 Enterococcus strains. The fAUC/MIC values for a 24-h bacteriostatic effect and a 1-log-unit drop in the viable count were 43.1 ± 38.4 and 50.0 ± 39.0 for VSSA, 3.2 ± 1.3 and 4.3 ± 1.3 for VISA, and 15.1 ± 8.8 and 40.1 ± 29.4 for the Enterococcus spp., respectively. The reason for the paradoxically low fAUC/MIC values for VISA strains is unknown. There was emergence of resistance to telavancin in the dose-ranging studies, as indicated by subpopulations able to grow on plates containing 2× MIC telavancin concentrations compared to the preexposure population analysis profiles. Changes in population analysis profiles were less likely with enterococci than with S. aureus, and the greatest risk of changed profiles occurred for both species at fAUC/MIC ratios of 1 to 10. Maintaining a fAUC/MIC ratio of >50 reduced the risk of subpopulations able to grow on antibiotic-containing media emerging. These data help explain the clinical effectiveness of telavancin against MRSA and indicate that telavancin may have clinically useful activity against Enterococcus spp., and perhaps also VISA, at human doses of 10 mg/kg of body weight/day. In addition, they support a clinical breakpoint of sensitive at ≤1 mg/liter for both S. aureus and Enterococcus spp.
- Subjects :
- Aminoglycosides pharmacology
Anti-Bacterial Agents pharmacology
Culture Media
Enterococcus classification
Enterococcus drug effects
Enterococcus growth & development
Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections drug therapy
Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections microbiology
Humans
Lipoglycopeptides
Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus drug effects
Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus growth & development
Microbial Sensitivity Tests methods
Staphylococcus aureus drug effects
Staphylococcus aureus growth & development
Teicoplanin administration & dosage
Teicoplanin pharmacokinetics
Teicoplanin pharmacology
Vancomycin administration & dosage
Vancomycin pharmacokinetics
Vancomycin pharmacology
Aminoglycosides administration & dosage
Aminoglycosides pharmacokinetics
Anti-Bacterial Agents administration & dosage
Anti-Bacterial Agents pharmacokinetics
Gram-Positive Cocci drug effects
Models, Biological
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1098-6596
- Volume :
- 55
- Issue :
- 2
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 21078943
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00933-10