Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (23)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhanel, G. G.
Right arrow Articles by Hoban, D. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhanel, G. G.
Right arrow Articles by Hoban, D. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (2002) 49, 807-812
© 2002 The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

Pharmacodynamic activity of fluoroquinolones against ciprofloxacin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae

George G. Zhanel,1,3,*, Danielle Roberts1, Andrew Waltky1, Nancy Laing1,3, Kim Nichol1,3, Heather Smith1, Ayman Noreddin1,2, Tracy Bellyou2,3 and Daryl J. Hoban1,3

Department of Medical Microbiology, Faculties of 1Medicine and 2Pharmacy, University of Manitoba; Departments of 3Clinical Microbiology and 4Medicine, Health Sciences Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Received 15 March 2001; returned 3 July 2001; revised 4 October 2001; accepted 2 February 2002.

The susceptibility and pharmacodynamic activity of ciprofloxacin and new fluoroquinolones were studied against low-level (MIC 4 mg/L) and high-level (MIC 16 mg/L) ciprofloxacin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. An in vitro pharmacodynamic model simulating free fluoroquinolone (protein unbound) serum concentrations, using Cpmax and AUC0–24 achieved (in healthy volunteers) after standard oral doses that are used for community-acquired respiratory infections, was used to compare bacterial killing by five fluoroquinolones against six ciprofloxacin-resistant S. pneumoniae isolates (four different resistance mutant phenotypes: ParC, efflux, ParC with efflux, and ParC and GyrA) obtained from an ongoing Canadian respiratory organism surveillance study. The potency (MIC only) of fluoroquinolones was gemifloxacin > moxifloxacin > gatifloxacin > levofloxacin > ciprofloxacin. Ciprofloxacin (free AUC0–24/MIC 0.9–3.5) produced no reduction of growth at 6, 24 or 48 h compared with the initial inoculum in all six strains. Levofloxacin (free AUC0–24/MIC 18–35) was bactericidal (>=3 log10 killing) at 6, 24 and 48 h for the ParC as well as the efflux mutants, but only bactericidal at 24 h for the ParC with efflux strain. Levofloxacin (free AUC0–24/MIC 4.4) demonstrated no reduction of growth relative to the initial inoculum against the ParC and GyrA mutants. Gatifloxacin and moxifloxacin (free AUC0–24/MIC 48 and 60, respectively) were bactericidal at 6, 24 and 48 h against the ParC, efflux, and ParC with efflux mutants, but demonstrated little to no growth reduction (free AUC0–24/MIC 6 and 7.5, respectively) in ParC and GyrA mutants. Gemifloxacin (free AUC0–24/MIC 67–133) was bactericidal (>=3 log10 killing) at 6, 24 and 48 h in all low-level ciprofloxacin-resistant S. pneumoniae mutants. Against two of the ParC and GyrA mutants, gemifloxacin (free AUC0–24/MIC 32) was bactericidal at 6, 24 and 48 h but against one ParC and GyrA mutant (free AUC0–24/MIC 16) gemifloxacin demonstrated reduced activity with initial killing at 24 h but with subsequent regrowth. These data indicate that ciprofloxacin produces no inhibition of growth of low- or high-level ciprofloxacin-resistant S. pneumoniae, whereas gatifloxacin, levofloxacin and moxifloxacin (moxifloxacin>gatifloxacin>levofloxacin) were bactericidal for low-level resistant strains but produced little or no inhibition of high-level resistant strains. Gemifloxacin at simulated free AUC0–24/MIC >=32, was bactericidal against low- and high-level resistant strains. When simulated free AUC0–24/ MIC was <16, gemifloxacin allowed regrowth of high-level ciprofloxacin-resistant strains.

* Correspondence address. Department of Microbiology, Health Sciences Centre, MS673, 820 Sherbrook Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3A 1R9, Canada. Tel: +1-204-787-4902; Fax: +1-204-787-4699; E-mail: ggzhanel{at}pcs.mb.ca


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
G. G. Zhanel, P. J. Baudry, F. Tailor, L. Cox, D. J. Hoban, and J. A. Karlowsky
Determination of the pharmacodynamic activity of clinically achievable tigecycline serum concentrations against clinical isolates of Escherichia coli with extended-spectrum {beta}-lactamases, AmpC {beta}-lactamases and reduced susceptibility to carbapenems using an in vitro model
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., October 1, 2009; 64(4): 824 - 828.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
G. G. Zhanel, D. Voth, K. Nichol, J. A. Karlowsky, A. M. Noreddin, and D. J. Hoban
Pharmacodynamic activity of ceftobiprole compared with vancomycin versus methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) and vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA) using an in vitro model
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., August 1, 2009; 64(2): 364 - 369.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
G. G. Zhanel, J. James, S. Derkatch, N. Laing, A. M. Noreddin, and D. J. Hoban
Pharmacodynamic activity of garenoxacin against ciprofloxacin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., July 1, 2006; 58(1): 112 - 116.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
D. Croisier, M. Etienne, L. Piroth, E. Bergoin, C. Lequeu, H. Portier, and P. Chavanet
In vivo pharmacodynamic efficacy of gatifloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae in an experimental model of pneumonia: impact of the low levels of fluoroquinolone resistance on the enrichment of resistant mutants
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., September 1, 2004; 54(3): 640 - 647.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
B. K Yoo, D. M Triller, C.-S. Yong, and T. P Lodise
Gemifloxacin: A New Fluoroquinolone Approved for Treatment of Respiratory Infections
Ann. Pharmacother., July 1, 2004; 38(7): 1226 - 1235.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
D. Croisier, M. Etienne, E. Bergoin, P.-E. Charles, C. Lequeu, L. Piroth, H. Portier, and P. Chavanet
Mutant Selection Window in Levofloxacin and Moxifloxacin Treatments of Experimental Pneumococcal Pneumonia in a Rabbit Model of Human Therapy
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., May 1, 2004; 48(5): 1699 - 1707.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
I. Morrissey and G. Tillotson
Activity of gemifloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., February 1, 2004; 53(2): 144 - 148.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
M. W. Garrison
Comparative antimicrobial activity of levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., September 1, 2003; 52(3): 503 - 506.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
J. J. Ross, M. G. Worthington, S. L. Gorbach, G. S. Tillotson, X. Zhao, K. Drlica, G. G. Zhanel, D. J. Hoban, C. K. Chan, J. Hutchinson, et al.
Resistance to Levofloxacin and Failure of Treatment of Pneumococcal Pneumonia
N. Engl. J. Med., July 4, 2002; 347(1): 65 - 67.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.