Previous Article | Next Article 
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, June 1998, p. 1370-1374, Vol. 42, No. 6
0066-4804/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Initial Concentration-Time Profile of Gentamicin Determines
Efficacy against Enterobacter cloacae ATCC 13047
Craig R.
Rayner,1,2
Lisa L.
Ioannides-Demos,1,*
Jo-Anne E.
Brien,2
Lisa L.
Liolios,3 and
W. John
Spicer3
Departments of
Pharmacy1 and
Microbiology and
Infectious Diseases,3 Alfred Healthcare
Group, Prahran, Victoria 3181, and
Department of Pharmacy
Practice, Monash University, Parkville, Victoria
3052,2 Australia
Received 27 May 1997/Returned for modification 11 November
1997/Accepted 10 February 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
In vitro studies were designed to investigate the influence of peak
drug concentration (Cmax), the area under the
concentration-time curve (AUC), and, consequently, the trough
concentration on the bactericidal effects of gentamicin against
Enterobacter cloacae (MIC, 0.5 mg/liter) by simulating
bolus versus infusion administration and bolus dosing with altered drug
clearance. Bacteria in the lag phase were exposed to gentamicin
concentration-time profiles modelling either bolus or infusion dosing
(AUC constant, Cmax changing) with 30-min
postdose peak concentrations (Cpeak30) of 4, 6, 8, and 10 mg/liter or bolus dosing with normal and double drug
clearance (Cmax constant, AUC changing)
corresponding to normal clearance profiles with
Cpeak30 of 6 and 8 mg/liter. Exposure to
gentamicin caused early bactericidal effects apparent by 2 h,
followed by variable bacteriostatic and recovery phases. Exposure to
bolus profiles resulted in greater bactericidal activity than the
corresponding infusion profile up to a Cpeak30
of 8 mg/liter. At a Cpeak30 of 10 mg/liter,
there were no differences in bactericidal effect. Double clearance
profiles had a reduced bactericidal effect at 6 mg/liter compared to
the corresponding normal clearance profile, but no differences in
bactericidal effect were observed for 8-mg/liter double and normal
clearance profiles. These results suggest that the initial exposure
(i.e., 0 to 30 min) is a more important determinant for bacterial
killing than the AUC or trough concentration for this bacterium.
Subject to confirmation of these findings with other gram-negative
bacteria, to optimize aminoglycoside efficacy the initial exposure
(Cmax) should be maximized by giving higher doses or bolus administration at intervals which may not produce detectable trough concentrations. Clinical trials with a broad range of
patients, especially those with higher clearance, would confirm these
in vitro observations and define optimal dosing recommendations.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Recent interest in alternative
dosing practices indicates that the past use of aminoglycosides has
been suboptimal. Dosing nomograms and therapeutic drug monitoring
guidelines have not been well based on a comprehensive understanding of
the relevant pharmacodynamics. By identifying those pharmacodynamic
parameters that determine efficacy and toxicity and relating them
to pharmacokinetic principles, it should be possible to optimize
aminoglycoside use and improve patient outcomes.
Aminoglycosides demonstrate concentration-dependent killing
(5, 6, 8, 12) and a prolonged concentration-dependent postantibiotic effect which varies according to bacterium (3, 15). For aminoglycosides, antibacterial efficacy has been shown to be dependent on the maximum concentration attained in serum (Cmax) (1, 9, 14), the area under the
concentration-time curve (AUC) (4, 13), and some trough
concentration contribution (7, 10). Optimal dosage design
relies on the determination of the relative importance of these
pharmacokinetic parameters.
Dependence on Cmax suggests that the method of
administration (rapid bolus rather than slow infusion) as well as the
size of the dose is important for bacterial killing, whereas dependence on the AUC suggests that the size of the dose alone is important. AUC
is also a function of drug clearance, and dependence on AUC demands
higher doses for patients with increased rates of clearance, i.e.,
patients with cystic fibrosis, burns, and severe sepsis. Conversely,
dependence on Cmax suggests that, provided the
dose achieves an adequate Cmax, the dose would
not need to be altered in response to increased clearance.
We report studies investigating independently the contributions of
Cmax and AUC to the antibacterial effect of
gentamicin against Enterobacter cloacae. The methods
involved in vitro concentration-time modelling of profiles with
constant AUC and variable Cmax (i.e., the same
dose given by bolus or infusion administration) and constant Cmax and variable AUC (i.e., the same dose given
by bolus administration with altered rates of clearance).
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
E. cloacae ATCC 13047 with a MIC and an MBC of
0.5 mg of gentamicin per liter was cultured overnight in brain heart
infusion broth (Oxoid, Basingstoke, England). The culture was diluted
to 107 CFU/ml in 0.1% peptone water (Difco Laboratories,
Detroit, Mich.), and a 1-ml sample was added to the experimental
culture broth, resulting in an initial density of 106
CFU/ml.
Firstly, in vitro concentration-time modelling of clinical
concentration-time bolus and infusion profiles was performed as previously described by Bastone and coworkers (1). The
8-mg/liter bolus profile had a target 30-min-postdose peak
concentration (Cpeak30) of 8.1 mg/liter, a
Cmax of 28 mg/liter, and an AUC of 36.6 mg
· h/liter. The corresponding infusion profile had a target Cpeak30 of 7.7 mg/liter, a
Cmax of 12.6 mg/liter, and an AUC of 34.9 mg · h/liter. Linear extrapolations of the above
profiles were performed to generate profiles targeting
Cpeak30s of 4, 6, and 10 mg/liter (Table 1).
The second series of studies involved characterizing the bolus profile
with a two-compartment pharmacokinetic model, doubling the elimination
rate constant, and simulating a bolus profile with a doubled rate of
drug clearance by nonlinear regression analysis (Sigmaplot; SPSS
Scientific Software, Chicago, Ill.). In vitro concentration-time
modelling crudely emulated the pharmacokinetic simulation
(1). Double clearance profiles targeted the same Cmax as the corresponding bolus profile with
half the AUC. As a result of higher clearance, the targeted
Cpeak30s were lower than the corresponding
normal clearance bolus profile Cpeak30s (Table
2).
Viable cell counts were performed as previously described by
Bastone and coworkers (1). Gentamicin concentrations
were measured by an EMIT immunoassay (Solaris; Syva Laboratories,
San Jose, Calif.) at 0, 0.16, 0.33, 0.5, 2.5, 4.5, 6.5, 8.5, 10.5, 24.5, and 48.5 h for the bolus and double clearance profiles and at
0.5,
0.25, 0, 0.17, 0.33, 0.5, 2.5, 4.5, 6.5, 8.5, 10.5, 24.5, and 48.5 h for the infusion profiles. All results were compared to
those for control cultures not exposed to gentamicin. All in vitro
experiments involved six replicates.
The AUC from 0 to 48.5 h was calculated with the trapezoidal rule.
The Student t test and the Mann-Whitney test were used for
statistical analyses depending on the distribution of data.
 |
RESULTS |
For all profiles, bacterial growth in the absence of
gentamicin showed a plateau at or near 109 CFU/ml. Within
each exposure level, a graded response was observed in the
presence of aminoglycoside (Fig. 1).

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Target gentamicin concentration-time profiles (i) and
time course of bacterial counts (ii) in studies with E. cloacae ATCC 13047 modelling bolus and infusion dosing associated
with 30-min-postdose concentrations of 6 (a) and 8 (b) mg/liter
(n = 6).
|
|
Bolus and infusion profiles with target Cpeak30s
of 4 and 6 mg/liter and infusion profiles with target
Cpeak30 of 8 mg/liter caused an early
bactericidal effect, followed by a bacteriostatic phase and regrowth.
Exposure to bolus profiles with target Cpeak30s of 8 and 10 mg/liter and to an infusion profile with a target Cpeak30 of 10 mg/liter caused complete bacterial
killing with no regrowth. There were significant differences in mean
bacterial counts among the target 4-mg/liter
Cpeak30 profiles at 2.5 and 10.5 h; the
6-mg/liter profiles at 10.5, 24.5, and 48.5 h; and the 8-mg/liter
profiles at 24.5 and 48.5 h. The differences in Cmax values between bolus and infusion
profiles were significant for all profiles investigated
(P < 0.05). Cpeak30s and
AUC0-48.5 were not significantly different over the
range of exposures investigated, except for the
Cpeak30s at the 10-mg/liter level (Fig. 1 and
Table 1).
The 6-mg/liter double clearance profile caused an early bactericidal
effect followed by a bacteriostatic phase and regrowth, whereas the
8-mg/liter double clearance profile caused complete killing with no
regrowth to 48.5 h. There were significant differences in the mean
bacterial counts between the 6-mg/liter double clearance and 6-mg/liter
bolus profiles at 10.5, 24.5, and 48.5 h. There were no
significant differences in bacterial counts observed between the
8-mg/liter profiles. The differences in Cmax
values between the double clearance and bolus profiles were not
significant for all profiles investigated.
Cpeak30s and AUC0-48.5 were
significantly different for all profiles investigated
(P < 0.001) (Fig. 2
and Table 2).

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Target gentamicin concentration-time profiles (i) and
time course of bacterial counts (ii) in studies with E. cloacae ATCC 13047 modelling bolus dosing with single clearance
and doubled gentamicin clearance corresponding to 30-min-postdose
concentrations of 6 (a) and 8 (b) mg/liter from single clearance bolus
dosing (n = 6).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
In vitro concentration-time modelling of bolus (high
Cmax) versus infusion (low
Cmax) dosing allowed the AUC to be held constant as the Cmax varied. Following exposure to
8-mg/liter profiles, there was evidence of complete bacterial
killing with the bolus profile but regrowth with the infusion profile.
This suggests that administration of gentamicin as a bolus (high
Cmax) dose should be more effective than
administration as a 30-min infusion (low Cmax).
At 10 mg/liter, the difference between exposure profiles disappeared,
suggesting that the method of administration may become irrelevant in
higher-dose regimens. These results are consistent with previous
observations involving gentamicin and Escherichia coli and
tobramycin and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (1, 14). In this study, as with E. coli, a
Cpeak30/MIC ratio of ~16:1 was necessary for
total killing (1), whereas other workers have reported
Cpeak30/MIC ratios of 10:1 to be necessary for
killing of other bacteria including P. aeruginosa (2,
11, 14).
In vitro concentration-time modelling of bolus administration (i.e.,
1× AUC) with normal clearance versus bolus administration with doubled
drug clearance (i.e., 0.5× AUC) allowed the
Cmax to be held constant but the AUC to vary. At
6 mg/liter, the bolus profile resulted in significantly reduced
bacterial growth from 10.5 to 48.5 h, compared to that for the
corresponding double clearance profile. However, there were no
significant differences observed in bacterial counts for the 8-mg/liter
profiles. These results suggest that the antibacterial effect of
gentamicin against E. cloacae may be unaffected for doubled
drug clearance with doses of
2.0 mg/kg of body weight given as an
intravenous bolus injection. However, at lower doses or in tissue
compartments where drug concentrations are more attenuated than those
in blood, a doubled rate of clearance may result in less-effective
suppression of bacterial regrowth.
The independent effect of Cmax has been reported
elsewhere (1, 9, 14), but this paper distinguishes it as a
significant determinant of efficacy, separate from the AUC. As
manipulation of Cmax, with constant AUC,
resulted in marked changes in antibacterial response and halving AUC,
with constant Cmax, had minimal effect on
antibacterial activity, it appears that Cmax
exerts an independent and more important effect than does AUC in
determining the antibacterial activity of gentamicin versus E. cloacae.
The role of a trough concentration as a determinant of
efficacy is minimized where an optimal Cmax is
achieved. However, in tissue infections a lower
Cmax would be achieved, and therefore trough
concentrations may be an important determinant of bacterial killing (7). This demonstration of significant
dependence of bacterial killing on Cmax and
lesser importance of the subsequent exposure including trough
concentration requires confirmation with other gram-negative
bacteria both in vitro and in vivo. If confirmed, however,
this would endorse administration regimens in which higher peak
concentrations are attained at extended dose intervals despite the
lower-to-negligible trough concentrations.
In summary, these in vitro studies suggest that the initial exposure
(i.e., 0 to 30 min) is a more important determinant for bacterial
killing than the AUC or trough concentration. The general applicability
of these results to the clinical setting awaits confirmation in studies
with other gram-negative bacteria. Clinical interpretation of these
findings would suggest that attempts to optimize aminoglycoside
efficacy would require maximizing the initial exposure
(Cmax and Cpeak30) by
bolus administration or giving higher doses at intervals which may not
produce detectable trough concentrations. Clinical trials with a broad
range of patients, including those with higher clearance, would confirm
these in vitro observations and help define precise dosing
recommendations.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Clinical Pharmacology, Alfred Hospital, Commercial Rd., Prahran,
Victoria 3181, Australia. Phone: 61-03-9276-3578. Fax: 61-03-9276-2404. E-mail: L.demos{at}alfred.edu.au.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Bastone, E. B.,
S. C. Li,
L. L. Ioannides-Demos,
W. J. Spicer, and A. J. McLean.
1993.
Kill kinetics and regrowth patterns of Escherichia coli exposed to gentamicin concentration-time profiles simulating in vivo bolus and infusion dosing.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
37:914-917[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Begg, E. J.,
B. A. Peddie,
S. T. Chambers, et al.
1992.
Comparison of gentamicin dosing regimens using an in vitro model.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
29:427-433[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
| Craig, W. A. 1993. Post antibiotic effects in
experimental infection models: relationship to in vitro
phenomena and treatment of infections in man. J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
31(Suppl. D):149-158.
|
| 4.
| Craig, W. A., J. Redington, and S. C. Ebert. 1991. Pharmacodynamics of amikacin in vitro and
in mouse thigh and lung infections. J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
27(Suppl. C):29-40.
|
| 5.
|
Hancock, R. E. W.
1981.
Aminoglycoside uptake and mode of action with special reference to streptomycin and gentamicin. I. Antagonists and mutants.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
8:249-276[Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Hancock, R. E. W.
1981.
Aminoglycoside uptake and mode of action with special reference to streptomycin and gentamicin. II. Effects of aminoglycosides on cells.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
8:429-445[Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Ioannides-Demos, L. L.,
L. Liolios,
P. Wood,
W. J. Spicer, and A. J. McLean.
1998.
Changes in MIC alter responses of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to tobramycin exposure.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
42:1365-1369[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Kadurugamuwa, J. L.,
A. J. Clarke, and T. J. Beveridge.
1993.
Surface action of gentamicin on Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
J. Bacteriol.
175:5798-5805[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
McLean, A. J.,
L. L. Ioannides-Demos,
S. C. Li,
E. B. Bastone, and W. J. Spicer.
1993.
Bactericidal effect of gentamicin peak concentration provides a rationale for administration of bolus doses.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
32:301-305[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
McLean, A. J.,
E. B. Bastone,
L. L. Ioannides-Demos, and W. J. Spicer.
1994.
Bactericidal effect of gentamicin trough concentration provides a rationale for administration of bolus doses and maintenance of trough levels.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
33:999-1004[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Moore, R. D.,
P. S. Lietman, and C. R. Smith.
1987.
Clinical response to aminoglycoside therapy: importance of the ratio of peak concentration to minimal inhibitory concentration.
J. Infect. Dis.
155:93-99[Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Taber, H. W.,
J. P. Mueller,
P. F. Miller, and A. S. Arrow.
1987.
Bacterial uptake of aminoglycoside antibiotics.
Microbiol. Rev.
51:439-457[Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Vogelman, B. S.,
S. Gudmundsson,
J. Turnidge,
J. Leggett,
S. Ebert, and W. A. Craig.
1988.
Correlation of antimicrobial pharmacokinetic parameters with therapeutic efficacy in an animal model.
J. Infect. Dis.
158:831-847[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Wood, P. J.,
L. L. Ioannides-Demos,
E. B. Bastone,
W. J. Spicer, and A. J. McLean.
1996.
Kill kinetics and regrowth patterns of Pseudomonas aeruginosa exposed to concentration-time profiles of tobramycin simulating in vivo infusion and bolus dosing.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
40:1321-1324[Abstract].
|
| 15.
|
Zhanel, G. G.,
D. J. Hoban, and G. K. M. Harding.
1991.
The postantibiotic effect: a review of in vitro and in vivo data.
DICP-Ann. Pharmacother.
25:153-163.
|
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, June 1998, p. 1370-1374, Vol. 42, No. 6
0066-4804/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Burkhardt, O., Lehmann, C., Madabushi, R., Kumar, V., Derendorf, H., Welte, T.
(2006). Once-daily tobramycin in cystic fibrosis: better for clinical outcome than thrice-daily tobramycin but more resistance development?. J Antimicrob Chemother
58: 822-829
[Abstract]
[Full Text]