The influence of protein binding on the antibacterial activity of faropenem against Haemophilus influenzae

Clinical Microbiology and Infection

Volumn 10, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 934-937

  Gustafsson, I ^a   Cars, Otto ^a,b  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Antimicrobial effect; Faropenem; Haemophilus influenzae; Pharmacodynamics; Protein binding; Serum

Indexed keywords

ALBUMIN; FROPENEM;

AGAR GEL DIFFUSION; ANTIBACTERIAL ACTIVITY; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL GROWTH; BACTERIAL STRAIN; BACTERIUM ISOLATE; CELL CULTURE; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); CONTROLLED STUDY; HAEMOPHILUS INFLUENZAE; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN BINDING; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

HAEMOPHILUS; HAEMOPHILUS INFLUENZAE;

EID: 6444230260     PISSN: 1198743X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2004.00977.x     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Woodcock JM, Andrews JM, Brenwald NP, Ashby JP, Wise R. The in-vitro activity of faropenem, a novel oral penem. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997; 39: 35-43.
2. Boswell FJ, Andrews JM, Wise R. Pharmacodynamic properties of faropenem demonstrated by studies of time-kill kinetics and postantibiotic effect. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997; 39: 415-418.
3. 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.
4. Cars O. Pharmacokinetics of antibiotics in tissues and tissue fluids: a review. Scand J Infect Dis 1990; 74(suppl): 23-33.
5. Kovar A, Dalla Costa T, Derendorf H. Comparison of plasma and free tissue levels of ceftriaxone in rats by microdialysis. J Pharm Sci 1997; 86: 52-56.
6. Scaglione F, Demartini G, Arcidiacono MM, Dugnani S, Fraschini F. Influence of protein binding on the pharmacodynamics of ceftazidime or ceftriaxone against gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria in an in vitro infection model. J Chemother 1998; 10: 29-34.
7. Ögren S, Cars O. Importance of drug-protein interactions and protein concentrations for antibiotic levels in serum tissue. Scand J Infect Dis 1985; 44(suppl): 34-40.
8. Craig WA. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice and men. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 26: 1-10.
9. Gustafsson I, Lowdin E, Odenholt I, Cars O. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters for antimicrobial effects of cefotaxime and amoxicillin in an in vitro kinetic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001; 45: 2436-2440.
10. Drusano GL, Preston SL, Hardalo C et al. Use of preclinical data for selection of a phase II/III dose for evernimicin and identification of a preclinical MIC breakpoint. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2001; 45: 13-22.
11. Liu P, Muller M, Derendorf H. Rational dosing of antibiotics: the use of plasma concentrations versus tissue concentrations. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2002; 19: 285-290.
12. Harding I, MacGowan AP, White LO, Darley ES, Reed V. Teicoplanin therapy for Staphylococcus aureus septicaemia: relationship between pre-dose serum concentrations and outcome. J Antimicrob Chemother 2000; 45: 835-841.
13. Schmitz FJ, Boos M, Mayer S, Verhoef J, Milatovic D, Fluit AC. In vitro activity of faropenem and 20 other compounds against beta-lactamase-positive and -negative Moraxella catarrhalis and Haemophilus influenzae isolates and the effect of serum on faropenem MICs. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 49: 220-223.