AAC
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Alvirez-Freites, E. J.
Right arrow Articles by Cynamon, M. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Alvirez-Freites, E. J.
Right arrow Articles by Cynamon, M. H.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, April 2002, p. 1022-1025, Vol. 46, No. 4
0066-4804/02/$04.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/AAC.46.4.1022-1025.2002
Copyright © 2002, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

In Vitro and In Vivo Activities of Gatifloxacin against Mycobacterium tuberculosis

Enrique J. Alvirez-Freites,1 Janna L. Carter,2 and Michael H. Cynamon1,2*

Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Upstate Medical University, State University of New York,1 Department of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Syracuse, New York2

Received 19 November 2001/ Returned for modification 10 December 2001/ Accepted 14 January 2002

Gatifloxacin (GAT) and moxifloxacin (MXF) were evaluated in vitro to determine their activities against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. GAT was subsequently compared in a dose range study to isoniazid (INH) in a murine tuberculosis model. GAT was somewhat less active than INH. GAT and MXF were evaluated in mice infected with M. tuberculosis and were found to have similar activities. GAT was studied alone and in combination with ethambutol, ethionamide (ETA), and pyrazinamide (PZA) and compared to INH and rifampin (RIF). GAT appears to have sufficient activity alone and in combination with ETA with or without PZA to merit evaluation for treatment of tuberculosis.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: VAMC, 800 Irving Ave., Syracuse, NY 13210. Phone: (315) 476-7461, ext. 3324. Fax: (315) 476-5348. E-mail: Michael.Cynamon{at}med.va.gov.

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, April 2002, p. 1022-1025, Vol. 46, No. 4
0066-4804/02/$04.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/AAC.46.4.1022-1025.2002
Copyright © 2002, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:



Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
J. Clin. Microbiol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.