Relationship between ceftolozane-tazobactam exposure and selection for Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistance in a hollow-fiber infection model

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Volumn 58, Issue 10, 2014, Pages 6024-6031

  VanScoy, Brian D ^a   Mendes, Rodrigo E ^b   Castanheira, Mariana ^b   McCauley, Jennifer ^a   Bhavnani, Sujata M ^a   Jones, Ronald N ^b   Friedrich, Lawrence V ^c   Steenbergen, Judith N ^c   Ambrose, Paul G ^a,d  

^a INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL PHARMACODYNAMICS   (United States)

^b JMI LABORATORIES   (United States)

^c CUBIST PHARMACEUTICALS INC   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CEFTOLOZANE; CEFTOLOZANE PLUS TAZOBACTAM; PIPERACILLIN; PIPERACILLIN PLUS TAZOBACTAM; TAZOBACTAM; ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; CEPHALOSPORIN DERIVATIVE; PENICILLANIC ACID;

AGAR DILUTION; ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL GROWTH; BACTERIAL STRAIN; BACTERIUM ISOLATE; BROTH DILUTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE MODEL; DRUG DOSE REGIMEN; DRUG EXPOSURE; GROWTH INHIBITION; HOLLOW FIBER; IN VITRO STUDY; MAXIMUM PLASMA CONCENTRATION; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; MUTATION RATE; NONHUMAN; PSEUDOMONAS AERUGINOSA; PSEUDOMONAS INFECTION; WILD TYPE; ANALOGS AND DERIVATIVES; DRUG EFFECTS; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TEST;

ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; CEPHALOSPORINS; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS; PENICILLANIC ACID; PSEUDOMONAS AERUGINOSA;

EID: 84907445421     PISSN: 00664804     EISSN: 10986596     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.02310-13     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Bhavnani SM, Hammel JP, Forrest A, Jones RN, Ambrose PG. 2003. Relationships between patient- and institution-specific variables and decreased antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-negative pathogens. Clin. Infect. Dis. 37:344-350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/375817.
2. Harris AD, Perencevich E, Roghmann MC, Morris CM, Kaye KS, Johnson JA. 2002. Risk factors for piperacillin-tazobactam-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa among hospitalized patients. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 46:854-858. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.463.854-858.2002.
3. Tam VH, Louie A, Deziel MR, Liu W, Leary R, Drusano GL. 2005. Bacterial-population responses to drug-selective pressure: examination of garenoxacin's effect on Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Infect. Dis. 192:420-428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/430611.
4. Felton TW, Goodwin J, O'Connor L, Sharp A, Gregson L, Livermore J, Howard SJ, Neely MN, Hope WW. 2013. Impact of bolus dosing versus continuous infusion of piperacillin and tazobactam on the development of antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57:5811-5819. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00867-13.
5. Sader HS, Rhomberg PR, Farrell DJ, Jones RN. 2011. Antimicrobial activity of CXA-101, a novel cephalosporin tested in combination with tazobactam against Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Bacteroides fragilis strains having various resistance phenotypes. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 55:2390-2394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01737-10.
6. Craig WA, Andes DR. 2013. In vivo activities of ceftolozane, a new cephalosporin, with and without tazobactam against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacteriaceae, including strains with extended-spectrum ß-lactamases, in the thighs of neutropenic mice. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57:1577-1582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01590-12.
7. Carmeli Y, Troillet N, Karchmer AW, S amore MH. 1999. Health and economic outcomes of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Arch. Intern. Med. 159:1127-1132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinte.159.10.1127.
8. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2012. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. Approved standard, ninth ed. CLSI document M07-A9. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
9. Louie A, Deziel MR, Liu WL, Drusano GL. 2007. Impact of resistance selection and mutant growth fitness on the relative efficacies of streptomycin and levofloxacin for plague therapy. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 51:2661-2667. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00073-07.
10. Louie A, Castanheira M, Liu W, Grasso C, Jones RN, Williams G, Critchley I, Thye D, Brown D, VanScoy B, Kulawy R, Drusano GL. 2012. Pharmacodynamics of ß-lactamase inhibition by NXL104 in combination with ceftaroline: examining organisms with multiple types of ß-lactamases. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 56:258-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.05005-11.
11. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals Inc. 2012. Zosyn package insert. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals Inc, Philadelphia, PA.
12. Ge Y, Whitehouse M, Friedland I, Talbot G. 2010. Pharmacokinetics and safety of CXA-101, anew antipseudomonal cephalosporin, in healthy adult male and female subjects receiving single and multiple intravenous injections. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 54:3427-3431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01753-09.
13. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2013. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; twenty-third informational supplement. Approved standard, ninth ed. CLSI document M100-S23. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
14. Hong MC, Hsu DI, Bounthavong M. 2013. Ceftolozane/tazobactam: a novel antipseudomonal cephalosporin and ß-lactamase-inhibitor combination. Infect. Drug Resist. 6:215-223.
15. VanScoy B, Mendes RE, Castanheira M, McCauley J, Bhavnani SM, Forrest A, Jones RN, Ambrose PG. 2013. Relationship between ceftolozane-tazobactam exposure and drug resistance amplification in a hollow-fiber infection model. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57:4134-4138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00461-13.
16. Louie A, Bied A, Fregeau C, VanScoy B, Brown D, Liu W, Bush K, Queenan AM, Morrow B, Khashab M, Kahn J, Nicholson S, Kulawy R, Drusano GL. 2010. Impact of different carbapenems and regimens of administration on resistance emergence for three isogenic Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains with differing mechanisms of resistance. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 54:2638-2645. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.03721-09.