In vitro models for prediction of antimicrobial activity: A pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic perspective

Journal of Chemotherapy

Volumn 9, Issue SUPPL. 1, 1997, Pages 55-63

  Li, R C ^a   Zhu, Z Y ^a  

^a and Hong Kong Branch of CAS Center for Excellence in Animal Evolution and Genetics   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Antimicrobial activity; Pharmacodynamics; Pharmacokinetics; Susceptibility testing

Indexed keywords

AMINOGLYCOSIDE; ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; BETA LACTAM ANTIBIOTIC; PENICILLIN V; PIPERACILLIN; TOBRAMYCIN;

ANTIBIOTIC SENSITIVITY; ANTIMICROBIAL ACTIVITY; CONFERENCE PAPER; IN VITRO STUDY; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; MODEL; NONHUMAN; PHARMACODYNAMICS; POSTANTIBIOTIC EFFECT; PREDICTION;

ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS;

EID: 0030837526     PISSN: 1120009X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (81)

1. Holford NHG, Sheiner LB. Understanding the dose-effect relationship: clinical application of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models. Clin Pharmacokinet 1981; 6: 429-453.
2. Kroboth PD, Schmith VD, Smith RB. Pharmacodynamic modelling: application to new drug development. Clin Pharmacokinet 1991; 20: 91-98.
3. Narang PK, Li RC. Factors influencing variability in kinetics and dynamics. In: Sramek, Cutler & Narang eds. Pharmacodynamics: perspectives in clinical pharmacology, New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1994: 45-71.
4. Craig WA, Ebert SC. Killing and regrowth of bacteria in vitro: a review. Scand J Infect Dis 1991; 74 (suppl): 63-70.
5. Mattie H. Kinetics of antimicrobial action. Rev Infect Dis 1981; 3: 19-27.
6. Hanberger H. Pharmacodynamic effects of antibiotics: studies on bacterial morphology, initial killing, postantibiotic effect and effective regrowth time. Scand J Infect Dis 1992; 81 (suppl): 1-52.
7. Lorian V. Low concentrations of antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 15-26.
8. Basker MJ, Gwynn MN, White AR. Comparative activities of ampicillin, epicillin and amoxycillin in vitro and in vivo. Chemotherapy 1979; 25 :170-180.
9. Rolinson GN, MacDonald AC, Wilson DA. Bactericidal action of β-lactam antibiotics on Escherichia coli with particular reference to ampicillin and amoxycillin. J Antimicrob Chemother 1977; 3: 541-553.
10. Guan L, Burnham JC. Postantibiotic effect of Cl-960, enoxacin and ciprofloxacin on Escherichia coli: effect on morphology and haemolysin activity. J Antimicrob Chemother 1992; 29: 529-538.
11. Grasso S, Meinardi G, Carneri I, Tamassia V. New in vitro model to study the effect of antibiotic concentration and rate of elimination on antibacterial activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1978; 13: 570-576.
12. Bergan T, Carlsen IB. Effect of antibiotics eliminated by first order kinetics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 147-152.
13. Barclay ML, Begg EJ, Chambers ST. Adaptive resistance following single doses of gentamicin in a dynamic in vitro model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 1951-1957.
14. Zabinski RA, Vance-Bryan K, Krinke AJ, Walker KJ, Moody JA, Rotschafer JC. Evaluation of activity of temafloxacin against Bacteroides fragilis by an in vitro pharmacodynamic system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 2454-2458.
15. Walker KJ, Larsson AJ, Zabinski RA, Rotschafer JC. Evaluation of antimicrobial activities of clarithromycin and 14-hydroxyclarithromycin against three strains of Haemophilus influenzae by using an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 2003-2007.
16. Reeves DS. Advantages and disadvantages of an in vitro model with two compartments connected by a dialyser: results of experiments with ciprofloxacin. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 159-167.
17. Dudley MN, Mandler HD, Gilbert D, Ericson J, Mayer KH, Zinner SH. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intravenous ciprofloxacin. Am J Med 1987; 82: 363-368.
18. Blaser J, Stone BB, Zinner SH. Two compartment kinetic model with multiple artificial capillary units. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 131-137.
19. Blaser J. In-vitro model for simultaneous simulation of the serum kinetics of two drugs with different half-lives. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 125-130.
20. Shah PM. Simultaneous simulation of two different concentration time curves in vitro. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 261-264.
21. Hunter PA, Rolinson GN, Witting DA. Comparative activity of amoxycillin and ampicillin in an experimental bacterial infection in mice. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1973; 4: 285-293.
22. Joiner K, Lowe B, Dzink J, Barlett JG. Comparative efficacy of 10 antimicrobial agents in experimental infections with Bacteroides fragilis. J Infect Dis 1982; 145: 561-568.
23. Gerber AU, Craig WA, Brugger HP, Feller C, Vastola AP, Brandel J. Impact of dosing intervals on activity of gentamicin and ticarcillin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in granulocytopenic mice. J Infect Dis 1983; 147: 910-917.
24. Tauber MG, Zak O, Scheld WM, Hengstler B, Sande MA. The postantibiotic effect in the treatment of experimental meningitis caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae in rabbits. J Infect Dis 1984; 149: 575-583.
25. Mordenti JJ, Quintiliani R, Nightingale CH. Combination antibiotics therapy: comparison of constant infusion and intermittent bolus dosing in an experimental animal model. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 313-321.
26. Bergholm AM, Dornbusch K. Postantibiotic effect of the penem FCE 22101 against selected gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria in vitro and in vivo by the use of a tissue cage model in rabbits. APMIS 1990; 98: 269-275.
27. Hessen MT, Pitsakis PG, Levison ME. Postantibiotic effect of penicillin plus gentamicin versus Enterococcus faccalis in vitro and in vivo. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989; 33: 608-611.
28. Odenholt-Tornqvist I. Pharmacodynamics of beta-lactam antibiotics. Studies on the paradoxical and postantibiotic effects in vitro and in an animal model. Scand J Infect Dis Suppl 1989; 58: 1-55.
29. Zhanel GG, Hoban DJ, Harding GK. The postantibiotic effect: a review of in vitro and in vivo data. DICP 1991; 25: 153-163.
30. Odenholt I, Holm SE, Cars O. Effects of supra- and sub-MIC benzylpenicillin concentrations on group A beta-haemolytic streptococci during the postantibiotic phase in vivo. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 26: 193-201.
31. Minguez MF, Izquierdo IJ, Caminero MM, Fuentes Martinez F, Prieto PJ. In vivo postantibiotic effect of isepamicin and other aminoglycosides in a thigh infection model in neutropenic mice. Chemotherapy 1992; 38: 179-184.
32. Fantin B, Ebert S, Leggett J, Vogelman B, Craig WA. Factors affecting duration of in vivo postantibiotic effect for aminoglycosides against gram-negative bacilli. J Antimicrob Chemother 1991; 27: 829-836.
33. Fantin B, Leggett J, Ebert S, Craig WA. Correlation between in vitro and in vivo activity of antimicrobial agents against gram-negative bacilli in a murine infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35: 1413-1422.
34. Chambers HF, Kennedy S. Effects of dosage, peak and trough concentrations in scrum, protein binding, and bactericidal rate on efficacy of teicoplanin in a rabbit model of endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 510-514.
35. Renneberg J, Walder M. Mouse model for evaluation of antibiotic treatment of acute and chronic infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1988; 7: 753-757.
36. Warren MD, Kernodle DS, Kaiser AB. Correlation of in-vitro parameters of antimicrobial activity with prophylactic efficacy in an intradermal model of Staphylococcus aureus infection. J Antimicrob Chemother 1991; 28: 731-740.
37. 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.
38. Craig WA. Interrelationship between pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in determining dosage regimens for broad-spectrum cephalosporins. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1995; 22: 89-96.
39. Craig WA. Once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing of aminoglycosides. J Chemother 1995; 2 (suppl): 47-52.
40. 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.
41. Gilbert DN. Once daily aminoglycoside therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35: 399-405.
42. Zhanel GG, Ariano RE. Once daily aminoglycoside dosing: maintained efficacy with reduced nephrotoxicity. Ren Fail 1992; 14: 1-9.
43. Parker SE, Davey PG. Practicalities of once-daily aminoglycoside dosing. J Antimicrob Ther 1993; 31: 4-8.
44. Barclay ML, Begg EJ, Hickling KG. What is the evidence for once-daily aminoglycoside therapy? Clin Pharmacokinet 1994; 27: 32-48.
45. Drusano GL. Human pharmacokinetics of beta-lactams aminoglycosides and their combination. Scand J Infect Dis 1991; 74: 235-248.
46. Schentag JJ. Correlation of pharmacokinetic parameters to efficacy of antibiotics: relationships between serum concentrations MIC values and bacterial eradication in patients with Gram negative pneumonia. Scand J Infect Dis 1991; 74: 218-234.
47. Zhanel GG, Craig WA. Pharmacokinetic contributions to postantibiotic effects: locus on aminoglycosides. Clin Pharmacokinet 1994; 27: 377-392.
48. Thonus IP, Fontline P, Michel MF. Ampicillin susceptibility and ampicillin-induced killing rate of Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1982; 22: 386-390.
49. Briceland LL, Pasko MT, Mylotte JM. Serum bactericidal rate as measure of antibiotic interactions. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987; 31: 679-685.
50. Stein DS, Libertin CR. Time kill curve analysis of vancomycin and rifampin alone and in combination against nine strains of nutritionally deficient streptococci. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1988; 10: 139-144.
51. Hanberger H, Nilsson LE, Mailer R, Nilsson M. Pharmacodynamics of beta-lactam antibiotics on gram-negative bacteria: initial killing, morphology and postantibiotic effect. Scand J Infect Dis 1990; 74 (suppl): 118-123.
52. Ackerman BH, Vannier AM, Eudy LB. 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.
53. Heman-Ackah SM, Garrett ER. Kinetics and mechanisms of drug action on microorganisms. 13. Comparative studies on action of lincomycin, clindamycin, and U 24728A. J Med Chem 1972; 15: 152-163.
54. Garrett KR, Won CM. Kinetics and mechanisms of drug action on microorganisms XVII: bactericidal effects of penicillin, kanamycin, and rifampin with and without organism pretreatment with bacteriostatic chloramphenicol, tetracycline, and novobiocin. J Pharm Sci 1973; 62: 1666-1673.
55. Li RC, Nix DE, Schentag JJ. Pharmacodynamic modeling of bacterial kinetics: β-lactam antibiotics against Escherichia coli. J Pharm Sci 1994; 83: 970-975.
56. Li RC, Schentag JJ, Nix DE. The fractional maximal effect method: a new way to characterize the effect of antibiotic combinations and other nonlinear pharmacodynamic interactions. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 523-531.
57. Li RC, Nix DH, Schentag JJ. Performance of the fractional maximal effect method: comparative interaction studies of ciprofloxacin and protein synthesis inhibitors. J Chemother 1996; 8: 23-32.
58. Li RC. Simultaneous kinetic analysis of the lag and bactericidal phases exhibited by β-lactams against Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 1996; 40: 2306-2310.
59. Mattie H. A mathematical description of short-term effects of beta-lactam antibiotics on bacterial growth in vitro. Cur Microbiol 1978; 1: 106-109.
60. Guerillot F, Carret G, Flandrois JP. Mathematical model for comparison of time-killing curves. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 1685-1689.
61. Nishida M, Murakawa T, Kamimura T, Okada T. Bactericidal activity of cephalosporins in an in vitro model simulating serum levels. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1978; 6: 6-12.
62. Bergan T, Carlsen IB, Fuglesang JH. An in vitro model for monitoring bacterial responses to antibiotic agents under simulated in vivo conditions. Infection 1980; 8: S96-S102.
63. Grasso S. Historical review of in-vitro models. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 99-102.
64. O'Grady F, Pennington JH. Bacterial growth in an in vitro system simulating conditions in the urinary bladder. Br J Exp Pathol 1966; 47: 152-157.
65. Sanfilippo A, Morvillo E. An experimental model for the study of the antibacterial activity of the sulfonamides. Chemotherapy 1968; 13: 54-60.
66. Murakawa T, Sakamoto H, Hirose T, Mishida M. New in vitro kinetic model for evaluating bactericidal efficacy of antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1980; 18: 377-381.
67. Drugeon HB, Maurisset B, Courtieu AL. Bactericidie des aminosides dans un systeme statique et dans un modele dynamique. Nouv Presse Med 1979; 8: 3403-3407.
68. Sous H, Hirsch I. Bactericidal activity of phenoxymethylpenicillin in an in-vitro model simulating tissue kinetics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 233-239.
69. Dalhoff A. Differences between bacteria grown in vitro and in vivo. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 175-195.
70. Zinner SH, Blaser J, Stone BB, Groner MC. Use of an in-vitro kinetic model to study antibiotic combinations. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 221-226.
71. Seeberg AH, Wiedeman B. Application of in vitro models: development of resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 241-249.
72. Sous H, Hirsch I. Bactericidal efficacy of cefmenoxime in an in vitro model system simulating tissue kinetics. 13th International Congress of Chemotherapy, Vienna, Austria. Contribution Nr. SE 8.3/1-2.
73. Gilbert P. The theory and relevance of continuous culture. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15 (suppl): 1-6.
74. Brown MRW, Collier PJ, Gilbert P. Influence of growth rate on susceptibility to antimicrobial agents: modification or the cell envelope and batch and continuous culture studies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 1623-1628.
75. Lorian V, Satta G. Letter to the editor "Differences between in vitro and in vivo studies". Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1988; 32: 1600-1601.
76. Haag R, Lexa P, Werkhauser I. Artifacts in dilution pharmacokinetic models caused by adherent bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1986; 29: 765-768.
77. Zhi JG, Nightingale CH, Quintiliani R. Microbial pharmacodynamics of piperacillin in neutropenic mice of systematic infection due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 1988; 16: 355-375.
78. Nolting A, Dalla Costa T, Rand KH, Derendorf H. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of the antibiotic effect of piperacillin in vitro. Pharmaceut Res 1996; 13: 91-96.
79. Johnson DE, Thompson B, Calia FM. Comparative activities of piperacillin, ceftazidime, and amikacin, alone and in all possible combinations, against experimental Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in neutropenic rats. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1985; 28: 735-739.
80. Zhi JG, Nightingale CH, Quintiliani R. Impact of dosage regimens on the efficacy of piperacillin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in neutropenic mice. J Pharm Sci 1988; 77: 991-992.
81. Zhu ZY, Lee SW, Li RC. Relationship between postantibiotic effect (PAE) and tobramycin exposure: comparison of activity exhibited by constant and fluctuating levels against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Pharmaceut Res 1996; 13 (suppl): 444.