This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sullivan, M C Articles by Lawlor, M T Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Sullivan, M C Articles by Lawlor, M T

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993 February; 37(2): 234-239

Evaluation of the efficacy of ciprofloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae by using a mouse protection model.

Department of Pharmacy, Hartford Hospital, Connecticut 06115.

ABSTRACT

A mouse protection model was used to investigate the association of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics with the in vivo efficacy of ciprofloxacin compared with that of penicillin G in the treatment of mice infected with Streptococcus pneumoniae ATCC 6303. Mice were inoculated intraperitoneally with 10 times the minimum lethal dose of S. pneumoniae. For determination of the 50% protective dose, subcutaneous antibiotics were begun 1 h after infection and were continued for 24 h. The 50% protective doses of ciprofloxacin and penicillin G were 25.52 +/- 1.95 and 0.307 +/- 0.006 mg/kg of body weight, respectively, an 83-fold difference in efficacy. For 100% protection with penicillin G, the time that the drug concentration needed to remain above the MIC was 51 min, a value easily achieved in most clinical situations. For 100% protection with ciprofloxacin, the peak concentration/MIC ratio must reach a value of 10.6. This ratio is rarely achieved with this drug against S. pneumoniae in clinical practice. These pharmacodynamic differences probably contribute to the reported differences in clinical success between these agents.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Ellbogen, M. H., Olsen, K. M., Gentry-Nielsen, M. J., Preheim, L. C. (2003). Efficacy of liposome-encapsulated ciprofloxacin compared with ciprofloxacin and ceftriaxone in a rat model of pneumococcal pneumonia. J Antimicrob Chemother 51: 83-91 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Bowker, K. E., Wootton, M., Rogers, C. A., Lewis, R., Holt, H. A., MacGowan, A. P. (1999). Comparison of in-vitro pharmacodynamics of once and twice daily ciprofloxacin. J Antimicrob Chemother 44: 661-667 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Sullivan, J. T., Woodruff, M., Lettieri, J., Agarwal, V., Krol, G. J., Leese, P. T., Watson, S., Heller, A. H. (1999). Pharmacokinetics of a Once-Daily Oral Dose of Moxifloxacin (Bay 12-8039), a New Enantiomerically Pure 8-Methoxy Quinolone. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43: 2793-2797 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Legg, J. M., Bint, A. J. (1999). Will pneumococci put quinolones in their place?. J Antimicrob Chemother 44: 425-427 [Full Text]  
• Lacy, M. K., Nicolau, D. P., Banevicius, M. A., Nightingale, C. H., Quintiliani, R. (1999). Protective effect of trovafloxacin, ciprofloxacin and ampicillin against Streptococcus pneumoniaein a murine sepsis model. J Antimicrob Chemother 44: 477-481 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• McKellar, Q., Gibson, I., Monteiro, A., Bregante, M. (1999). Pharmacokinetics of Enrofloxacin and Danofloxacin in Plasma, Inflammatory Exudate, and Bronchial Secretions of Calves following Subcutaneous Administration. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43: 1988-1992 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• MacGowan, A. P., Wootton, M., Holt, H. A. (1999). The antibacterial efficacy of levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosaassessed by combining antibiotic exposure and bacterial susceptibility. J Antimicrob Chemother 43: 345-349 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Bédos, J.-P., Azoulay-Dupuis, E., Moine, P., Muffat-Joly, M., Veber, B., Pocidalo, J.-J., Vallée, E. (1998). Pharmacodynamic Activities of Ciprofloxacin and Sparfloxacin in a Murine Pneumococcal Pneumonia Model: Relevance for Drug Efficacy. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 286: 29-35 [Abstract] [Full Text]