A novel in vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model based on two-compartment open model used to simulate serum drug concentration-time profiles

Microbiology and Immunology

Volumn 51, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 567-575

  Tomita, Tsutomu ^a   Ohara Nemoto, Yuko ^a,b   Moriyama, Hitomi ^a   Ozawa, Ayako ^a   Takeda, Yoshifumi ^a   Kikuchi, Ken ^c  

^a Cine Science Laboratory   (Japan)

^b NAGASAKI UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^c JUNTENDO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Escherichia coli O157:H7; Intravenous infusion; Pharmacodynamic model; Two compartment model

Indexed keywords

CEFAZOLIN; FOSFOMYCIN;

AGAR GEL ELECTROPHORESIS; ANTIBACTERIAL ACTIVITY; ANTIBIOTIC SENSITIVITY; ANTIMICROBIAL ACTIVITY; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL GROWTH; BACTERIAL STRAIN; BACTERICIDAL ACTIVITY; COMPARTMENT MODEL; CONTENT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE TIME EFFECT RELATION; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG PENETRATION; ENTEROHEMORRHAGIC ESCHERICHIA COLI; ESCHERICHIA COLI O157; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MELTING POINT; NONHUMAN; SIMULATION; STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS;

ESCHERICHIA COLI; STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS;

EID: 34249009568     PISSN: 03855600     EISSN: 13480421     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1348-0421.2007.tb03934.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Aeschlimann, J.R., Hershberger, E., and Rybak, M.J. 2000. Activities of trovafloxacin and ampicillin-sulbactam alone or in combination versus three strains of vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro pharmacodynamic infection model. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 44: 1153-1158.
2. Alou, L., Sevillano, D., Bugella, J.H., Fuentes, F., Gómez-Lus, M.L., and Prieto, J. 2001. Evaluation of two in vitro pharmacodynamic simulation models: microfiltration versus centrifugation-filtration. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 17: 365-370.
3. Blaser, J., Stone, B.B., and Zinner, S.H. 1985. Two compartment kinetic model with multiple artificial capillary units. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 15 (Suppl A): 131-137.
4. Blaser, J., Stone, B.B., and Zinner, S.H. 1985. Efficacy of intermittent versus continuous administration of netilmicin in a two-compartment in vitro model. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 27: 343-349.
5. Blaser, J., and Zinner, S.H. 1987. In vitro models for the study of antibiotic activities. Prog. Drug Res. 31: 349-381.
6. Firsov, A.A., Vostrov, S.N., Kononenko, O.V., Zinner, S.H., and Portnoy, Y.A. 1999. Prediction of the effects of inoculum size on the antimicrobial action of trovafloxacin and ciprofloxacin against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli in an in vitro dynamic model. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43: 498-502.
7. Garrison, M.W., Vance-Bryan, K., Larson, T.A., Toscano, J.P., and Rotschafer, J.C. 1990. Assessment of effects of protein binding on daptomycin and vancomycin killing of Staphylococcus aureus by using an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 34: 1925-1931.
8. Gibaldi, M., and Perrier, D. 1982. One-compartment model, p.1-43, Multicompartment models, p.45-109, In Pharmacokinetics, 2nd ed, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.
9. Goto, Y., Hiramatsu, K., and Nasu, M. 1999. Improved efficacy with nonsimultaneous administration of netilmicin and minocycline against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in in vitro and in vivo models. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 11: 39-46.
10. Grasso, S., Meinardi, G., De Carneri, I., and Tamassia, V. 1978. New in vitro model to study the effect of antibiotic concentration and rate of elimination on antibacterial activity. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 13: 570-576.
11. Irie, S., Terakawa, M., Ishibashi, K., Tabata, K., Suzuki, S., and Yokota, Y. 1999. Pharmacokinetic study of a parenteral cephalosporin, cefazolin in healthy volunteers given cefamezin-infusion 1-g kit. Antibiotic Chemother. 5: 100-108 (in Japanese).
12. Kawabata, N., Shiraha, Y., Doi, S., Umemura, K., and Yaginuma, K. 1978. A study on serum level and urinary excretion of fosfomycin-Na in man with special reference to pharmacokinetic analysis. Jpn. J. Antibiot. 31: 549-560 (in Japanese).
13. Keil, S., and Wiedemann, B. 1995. Mathematical corrections for bacterial loss in pharmacodynamic in vitro dilution models. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 39: 1054-1058.
14. MacGowan, A., Rogers, C., and Bowker, K. 2001. In vitro models, in vivo models, and pharmacokinetics: what can we learn from in vitro models? Clin. Infect. Dis. 33 (Suppl 3): S214-220.
15. MacGowan, A.P., Noel, A.R., Rogers, C.A., and Bowker, K.E. 2004. Antibacterial effects of amoxicillin-clavulanate against Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae strains for which MICs are high, in an in vitro pharmacokinetic model. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 48: 2599-2603.
16. McGrath, B.J., Lamp, K.C., and Rybak, M.J. 1993. Pharmacodynamic effects of extended dosing intervals of imipenem alone and in combination with amikacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in an in vitro model. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 37: 1931-1937.
17. Murakami, K., and Tomasz, A. 1989. Involvement of multiple genetic determinants in high-level methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. J. Bacteriol. 171: 874-879.
18. Murakawa, T., Sakamoto, H., Hirose, T., and Nishida, M. 1980. New in vitro kinetic model for evaluating bactericidal efficacy of antibiotics. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 18: 377-381.
19. Murakawa, T. 1992. In vitro/in vivo kinetic models for evaluating efficacy of antimicrobial agents, p.165-177. In Kuemmerle, H.-P., Murakawa, T., and Nightingale, C.H. (eds), Pharmacokinetics of antimicrobial agents: principles, methods, application, ecomed verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, Lech.
20. Navashin, S.M., Fomina, I.P., Firsov, A.A., Chernykh, V.M., and Kuznetwova, S.M. 1989. A dynamic model for in-vitro evaluation of antimicrobial action by simulation of the pharmacokinetic profiles of antibiotics. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 23: 389-399.
21. NCCLS. 2000. Performance standard for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 9th informational supplements. NCCLS, Wayne.
22. Sanfilippo, A., and Morvillo, E. 1968. An experimental model for the study of the antibacterial activity of the sulfonamides. Chemotherapy 13: 54-60.
23. Tenover, F.C., Lancaster, M.V., Hill, B.C., Steward, C.D., Stocker, S.A., Hancock, G.A., O'Hara, C.M., Clark, N.C., and Hiramatsu, K. 1998. Characterization of staphylococci with reduced susceptibilities to vancomycin and other glycopeptides. J. Clin. Microbiol. 36: 1020-1027.
24. Toothaker, R.D., Welling, P.G., and Craig, W.A. 1982. An in vitro model for the study of antibacterial dosage regimen design. J. Pharm. Sci. 71: 861-864.
25. Totsuka, K., Shiseki, M., Kikuchi, K., and Matsui, Y. 1999. Combined effects of vancomycin and imipenem against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in vitro and in vivo. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 44: 455-460.