Previous Article | Next Article 
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, June 2000, p. 1443-1447, Vol. 44, No. 6
0066-4804/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Pharmacokinetics of Gentamicin C1,
C1a, and C2 in Beagles after a Single
Intravenous Dose
Nina
Isoherranen,1,2
Eran
Lavy,3 and
Stefan
Soback1,*
Kimron Veterinary Institute, Beit
Dagan,1 and Koret School of Veterinary
Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem,
Jerusalem,3 Israel, and Laboratory
of Analytical Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of
Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland2
Received 8 September 1999/Returned for modification 26 December
1999/Accepted 3 March 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
The pharmacokinetics of gentamicin C1, C2,
and C1a were studied in six beagles after
administration of gentamicin at 4 mg/kg of body
weight as a single intravenous bolus dose. Plasma concentrations of the
gentamicin components were analyzed with a novel high-performance liquid chromatography method capable of identifying and quantifying each of the components. The pharmacokinetic analysis of the plasma concentration-versus-time data was performed using the noncompartmental approach. The results indicated significant differences in the pharmacokinetic characteristics between the gentamicin
components C1, C1a, and C2. The
mean residence times of gentamicin C1,
C1a, and C2 were 81 ± 13, 84 ± 12, and 79 ± 13 min (mean ± standard deviation),
respectively. The half-lives of the respective components were 64 ± 12, 66 ± 12 and 63 ± 12 min. Clearance (CL) of
gentamicin C1, 4.62 ± 0.71 ml
min
1 kg
1, was significantly higher
(P = 0.0156) than CL of gentamicin C1a, 1.81 ± 0.26 ml min
1
kg
1, and C2, 1.82 ± 0.25 ml
min
1 kg
1. Similarly, the volume of
distribution at steady state (Vss) of
gentamicin C1, 0.36 ± 0.04 liter
kg
1, was significantly higher (P = 0.0156) than the Vss of
gentamicin C1a, 0.14 ± 0.01 liter
kg
1, and C2, 0.15 ± 0.02 liter
kg
1. Tissue binding was considered
the most likely cause for the difference. The difference may have
clinical and toxicological significance.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Gentamicin is an aminoglycoside
antibiotic used in treatment of serious infections caused by
gram-negative aerobic bacteria. Gentamicin is not a single compound but
a mixture of three major components, gentamicin
C1, C1a, and C2, and a number of
minor components. The major components differ in the degree of
methylation in the 2-amino-hexose (purpurosamine) ring. Gentamicin
C1a lacks methyl groups in this ring, while C1
and C2 have a methyl group in the 6' position (Fig.
1). Gentamicin C1 is also N
methylated in this position, while C1a and C2
have free amines instead. The C2 component consists of two
stereoisomers (C2 and C2a). It should be
emphasized that the difference in the chemical structure between the
gentamicin components is essentially similar to the
difference between gentamicins and some other
aminoglycosides, such as tobramycin and netilmicin. It has also been
recognized that there is a wide variation in the component ratio
between different pharmaceutical gentamicin preparations
(4, 10, 22). Gentamicin, like all aminoglycoside
antibiotics, is nephrotoxic and ototoxic. Nephrotoxicity occurred in
17% and ototoxicity in 8% of patients treated with gentamicin (16), but in some populations the
numbers could be higher (27). There appears to be a
difference in the incidence of toxicity as a result of once- or
multiple-daily administration protocols (15), suggesting a
correlation between the toxicity and pharmacokinetics of
gentamicin. Furthermore, the components were reported to
possess different nephrotoxicity in animals (10), but the
human data were inconclusive (7, 13). Strong tissue binding
of gentamicin was reported (21).
Radioimmunoassays, fluorescence polarization immunoassays, or
microbiological assays have been used for quantitative determination of
gentamicin in serum and/or plasma in pharmacokinetic
studies (23). The limits of quantification of total
gentamicin of these methods vary considerably but were
generally in the range of 0.2 to 0.5 µg/ml. These methods lack the
ability to identify and measure separately the three components. It is
also not clear whether the performance characteristics of these methods
were equal for the individual components, hence causing a potential
bias in the accuracy of total gentamicin concentration.
Consequently, the composition of the analytical standard, against which
the concentrations are measured, and the different ratios of the three
components in pharmaceutical gentamicin preparations are
also bound to increase the analytical bias. Therefore, comprehensive
understanding of gentamicin pharmacokinetics is profoundly
dependent on an analytical method capable of analyzing the different
components separately.
The presence of a deep-compartment and a three-compartment model of
gentamicin disposition was suggested (3, 24,
27), and in some studies a terminal half-life
(t1/2) of more than 100 h was observed
(3, 20, 21). However, other reports concluded that a
two-compartment model best described gentamicin
pharmacokinetics and were unable to observe the deep compartment
(6, 17, 18). At this point there seems to be no general
agreement on a specific compartmental model best describing
gentamicin pharmacokinetics. The basic problem in these
studies is that the reported pharmacokinetics of gentamicin
relate to an unknown combination of chemically related but different
compounds addressed as gentamicin. Therefore, the variation
in gentamicin pharmacokinetics and nephrotoxicity, reported in the different studies, could have resulted from the different pharmacokinetic characteristics of the components. Because the analytical uncertainties have not been clarified, studies concerning gentamicin pharmacokinetics may be indicative of the
pharmaceutical preparation used in the study. However, meaningful
pharmacokinetics can be determined for a single compound only.
Gentamicin C1 pharmacokinetics were reported to differ from
total gentamicin pharmacokinetics (13). To our
knowledge the pharmacokinetics of the three major gentamicin components have not been investigated.
This paper describes the pharmacokinetics of the three major
gentamicin components in six beagles, using a
reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)
method for analysis of plasma concentrations.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Gentamicin (gentamicin base as sulphate [80 mg/2
ml], RAFA Laboratories Ltd., Jerusalem, Israel) containing 19.1 mg of
gentamicin C1a, 31.3 mg of
gentamicin C1, and 49.6 mg of
gentamicin C2 in 100.0 mg total
gentamicin was administered as a single intravenous (i.v.)
bolus into the saphenic vein at 4 mg of total gentamicin/kg of body weight to six beagles (four males and two females) weighing 16 to 20 kg. Venous blood samples (5 ml) were collected at 0, 10, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, 360, 480, 600, and 720 min and 24, 48, and
72 h after drug administration in heparinized tubes via an
indwelling jugular vein catheter. Plasma samples were stored at
30°C until analysis. The analytical work was completed within 2 months after sample collection.
The gentamicin C1, C1a, and
C2 components were separated in a silica column according
to the method described by Claes et al. (4) and used as
analytical standards. Concentrations of the gentamicin
components in plasma were assayed according to the method of
Isoherranen and Soback (9). A polymer solid-phase extraction
cartridge (Oasis, 30 mg; Waters Associates, Milford, Mass.) was
conditioned with 1 ml of methanol followed by 1 ml of 0.17 M Tris
buffer at pH 10.0. One milliliter of plasma sample, mixed thoroughly
with 5 ml of 0.17 M Tris buffer at pH 12.0, was loaded on the
cartridge. The column was washed with 2 ml of 0.17 M Tris buffer, pH
10.0, and dried. An aliquot of 300 µl of derivatization reagent (0.5 ml of 0.17 M Tris at pH 12.0, 0.5 ml of water, and 50 mg of
1-fluoro-2,4,dinitrobenzene in 2.2 ml of acetonitrile) was applied to
the solid-phase cartridge, and the cartridge was placed into an oven at
100°C for 1 h. The derivatized gentamicin was then
eluted with 5 ml of acetonitrile and evaporated to dryness. The residue
was dissolved into 300 µl of acetonitrile and transferred to an
autosampler vial for HPLC analysis. A 20-µl aliquot was then injected
to the chromatography, consisting of a low-pressure mixing gradient
HPLC system, a diode array detector, and an autosampler (model H-P
1100; Hewlett-Packard, Waldbron, Germany). The separation was performed
using a reversed-phase column (Symmetry C18; 100 by 4.6 mm;
3.5-µm particle size; Waters Associates) with a C18 precolumn and acetonitrile-Tris buffer (8.3 mM) at pH 7.0 (68:32, vol/vol) in the mobile phase at a flow rate of 1.2 ml/min. The 2,4-dinitrophenyl derivatives of gentamicin components were
detected by UV absorption at 365 nm. The limits of quantification (LOQ) of the components, defined as nine times noise, were 0.07 µg/ml (C1) and 0.1 µg/ml (C1a and C2),
and the recovery was 72%. The linear range was from 0.07 µg/ml or
0.1 µg/ml (C1a and C2) to 20 µg/ml for the
components. The intraday coefficients of variation of the assay were
7.7, 10, and 11 and 2.1, 4.2, and 1.1 for gentamicin C1a, C2, and C1 at 0.1 and 20 µg/ml, respectively. The interday coefficients of variation of the
assay were 13, 12, and 7.7 and 4.8, 6.3, and 2.0 for
gentamicin C1a, C2, and
C1 at 0.1 and 20 µg/ml, respectively.
Pharmacokinetic analysis.
The pharmacokinetics of the
gentamicin components were determined by use of a
noncompartmental approach based on the statistical moment theory
(26) and utilizing a computer program (25). The
linear terminal slope (
) was calculated by a linear, least-squares regression analysis, using the last five to six plasma
concentration-versus-time points. The t1/2 was
calculated according to the following equation: t1/2 = 1n2/
. (8). The mean
residence time (MRT) was determined by the equation MRT = AUMC/AUC, where AUMC is the area under the first moment curve and AUC
is the area under the plasma drug concentration-time (zero moment)
curve (26). The AUMC and AUC were calculated by the
trapezoidal method and extrapolated to infinity (25). The volume of distribution at steady state (Vss) was
estimated as follows:
|
(1)
|
where D is the dose and CL is the total body
clearance (2). The volume of distribution in the elimination
phase (V
) was calculated according to the
following equation: V
= D/(AUC ×
). Total body clearance (CL) was
calculated by use of the following equation (8).
|
(2)
|
Statistical analysis.
Friedman's nonparametric
repeated-measures test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to
analyze statistical differences (P < 0.05) in the
determined pharmacokinetic parameters.
 |
RESULTS |
Figure 2 illustrates a chromatogram
of the separation of the gentamicin components in dog
plasma. The pharmacokinetic parameters for each gentamicin
component and for the total gentamicin in the six dogs are
presented in Table 1. The total
gentamicin pharmacokinetics, determined using the sum of
the concentrations of the components, are given for comparison only
with full knowledge that pharmacokinetics of a mixture of compounds
cannot be determined unequivocally. Figure
3 depicts the plasma
concentration-versus-time curves for the gentamicin
components and total gentamicin. The plasma
gentamicin component concentrations were below the LOQ in
all samples collected at 480 min and thereafter.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Representative chromatogram of gentamicin
analysis in the plasma of dog 3 at 120 min after administration,
representing 0.94-µg/ml gentamicin C1a,
1.68-µg/ml gentamicin C2, and 0.92-µg/ml
gentamicin C1.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 1.
Pharmacokinetic parameters determined for the total
gentamicin and components after i.v. administration of
gentamicin (4 mg/kg) to six beagles
|
|

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Plasma concentration (mean ± standard deviation
[error bars]) versus-time curves of gentamicin
C1a, C2, and C1 after i.v.
administration of 0.8-, 2-, and 1.2-mg/kg concentrations of the
respective gentamicin components to six beagles.
|
|
No difference was observed in the MRT and t1/2
of the three gentamicin components. The CL of
gentamicin C1 was 150% higher than the CL of
gentamicin C1a and C2. The
Vss of gentamicin C1 was
145% higher than the Vss of C1a and
C2. There were significant differences in the
Vss (P = 0.0055),
V
(P = 0.0017), and CL
(P = 0.0081) values between the three components. The
volumes of distribution and CL clearance of gentamicin
C1 were significantly higher than those of
gentamicins C1a and C2
(P = 0.0156). There were no differences in
Vss, V
, and CL values
between C1a and C2.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Gentamicin pharmacokinetics has been a subject of considerable
interest due to its clinical importance on the one hand and its
toxicity on the other hand. Gentamicin is a very polar entity that does
not undergo metabolism in the body and is excreted mainly by glomerular
filtration (27). However, the fact that
gentamicin is actually a combination of three major
components, gentamicin C1, C1a, and
C2, has gone practically unnoticed in pharmacokinetic studies. Furthermore, these components appear in pharmaceutical preparations in widely variable ratios (4, 10, 22). The analytical problems associated with determination of the combined concentration of the three compounds were identified already in the
early studies (12, 21), but this aspect was widely
overlooked in the subsequent research.
The plasma concentration-time curves of the gentamicin
components generated in the present study represent disposition
profiles of a multicompartment model. In one-compartment models
V
is equal to Vss
(8). These volume terms are exit site dependent, and the
presence of a slowly equilibrating compartment could also cause the
difference in these terms (14). The results of this study
revealed that the difference between V
and
Vss of the three components was small (7 to
14%). No sign of a long terminal phase could be distinguished from the
plasma concentration-time curves, as the concentrations declined below
the LOQ after 360 min, despite the limit of the detection in the
present study that was equal to or less than those in most other
studies describing gentamicin pharmacokinetics. The CL,
Vss, and V
estimated in the present study for total gentamicin were lower than
the respective values reported earlier (1, 17), which were
closer to those determined here for gentamicin
C1. In accordance with our results, gentamicin
C1 was reported to have higher CL and volume of
distribution than total gentamicin in humans
(13).
The relationship of volume of distribution to the plasma and tissue
volumes can be characterized as follows: V = VP + VT(fu/fuT), where
VP is the volume of plasma,
VT is the aqueous volume outside plasma into
which the drug distributes, fu is the fraction
unbound in plasma, and fuT is the fraction
unbound in tissue (19). Because all the components were
administered simultaneously to the dogs, the VP
and VT were identical for all the components.
Thus, the differences in Vss between the
components indicated that C1 had either a larger
fu or a smaller fuT than
the two other components. The plasma protein binding of
gentamicin (and aminoglycosides in general) is less than
10% (27), and it is inconceivable that it could contribute
to the 145% difference in Vss. Therefore, gentamicins C1a and C2 appear to be
less bound to tissue than gentamicin C1. This
may be of clinical importance if gentamicin nephrotoxicity
results from strong binding to the renal tissue. The binding between
gentamicin and phospholipids was found to be ionic
(12).
More than 95% of the total gentamicin dose is excreted
unchanged in urine in dogs (24). The renal clearance
(CLR) is defined as: CLR = fu × GFR + CLS
CLRa, where GFR is the glomerular filtration rate,
CLS is the tubular secretion clearance, and
CLRa is the tubular reabsorption clearance (11).
Consequently, if the clearance of the unbound drug is less than the
GFR, reabsorption occurs. A general estimate of the glomerular
filtration rate of 6.13 ml min
1 kg
1 in dog
was given (5), but GFR values of 3.8 and 4.0 ml
min
1 kg
1 have also been described (11,
17). The CL of gentamicin C1 was similar
to the lower GFR values reported for dogs. The significantly lower CL
of gentamicin C1a and C2 compared
to gentamicin C1 suggests that
gentamicin C1a and C2 were
reabsorbed in the kidney to a much higher extent than
gentamicin C1. It is noteworthy that
irreversible tissue binding would increase CL values by decreasing the
AUC in equation 2.
A decrease in gentamicin CL as a function of increased dose
was described (6). In the present study the components were given in different doses which, accordingly, could have caused the
difference in their pharmacokinetics. However, this seems unlikely,
because the lowest CL was determined for the component given at the
lowest dose.
According to equation 1, Vss, CL, and MRT are
interrelated. Because no difference was observed in the MRTs of the
three components Vss and CL must change in the
same direction and on the same order of magnitude. Analogously, the
similar t1/2 values of the three components
result from changes of V
and CL in the same
direction and on the same order of magnitude according to the equation
t1/2 = V
1n2/CL.
The fact that both volume of distribution and CL of
gentamicin C1a and C2 or
gentamicin C1 are affected to a similar
magnitude would support the hypothesis that the change results from the
same physiological cause. Tissue binding appears the most likely reason
to affect both parameters in a similar manner. Renal uptake by
endocytosis of polybasic drugs, such as aminoglycosides, mediated by an
epithelial glycoprotein was reported (12). Accordingly, the
uptake of gentamicin C1 in the present study
would be higher than those of gentamicin C1a
and C2.
In commercial preparations, gentamicin C1
consists of 25 to 50% of the total gentamicin. Equation 2
can be rearranged to AUC = D/CL, and the extreme values
of the component ratio can be used as the dose and the values obtained
in this study as the CL. Consequently, the total gentamicin
AUC, calculated as the sum of the AUC values for each component, may
vary up to 20%. This simulation emphasizes the importance of
determining the pharmacokinetics of each gentamicin component separately, including the quantitative assessment of each
component in the administered dose. Furthermore, the different pharmacokinetics of the components may warrant reevaluation of the use
of single-component gentamicin preparations in clinical situations.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Rica Benita and Dana Levin for their skillful technical assistance.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Kimron
Veterinary Institute, Beit Dagan, Israel. Phone: (972)-3-9681713.
Fax: (972)-3-9681692. E-mail:
ssoba_vs{at}netvision.net.il.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Batra, V. K.,
J. A. Morrison, and T. R. Hoffman.
1983.
Pharmacokinetics of piperacillin and gentamicin following intravenous administration to dogs.
J. Pharm. Sci.
72:894-898[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Benet, L. Z., and R. Galeazzi.
1979.
Noncompartmental determination of the steady-state volume of distribution.
J. Pharm. Sci.
68:1071-1074[Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Brown, S. A.,
R. W. Nelson, and C. Scott-Moncrieff.
1991.
Gentamicin pharmacokinetics in diabetic dogs.
J. Vet. Pharmacol. Ther.
14:90-95[Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Claes, P. J.,
R. Busson, and H. Vanderhaeghe.
1984.
Determination of the component ratio of commercial gentamicins by high-performance liquid chromatography using pre-column derivatization.
J. Chromatogr.
298:445-457[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Davies, B., and T. Morris.
1993.
Physiological parameters in laboratory animals and humans.
Pharm. Res.
10:1093-1096[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Demczar, D. J.,
A. N. Nafziger, and J. S. Bertino, Jr.
1997.
Pharmacokinetics of gentamicin at traditional versus high doses: implications for once-daily aminoglycoside dosing.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
41:1115-1119[Abstract].
|
| 7.
|
Forrey, A. W.,
B. T. Meijsen-Ludwick,
M. A. O'Neill,
B. M. Maxwell,
A. D. Blair, and R. E. Cutler.
1978.
Nephrotoxicity: a comparison in humans of gentamicin and gentamicin C1 administration.
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
44:453-462[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 8.
|
Gibaldi, M., and D. Perrier.
1982.
Pharmacokinetics, 2nd ed., p. 199-219.
Marcel Dekker, New York, N.Y.
|
| 9.
| Isoherranen, N., and S. Soback. Determination of
gentamicin C1, C1a and C2 in plasma
and urine by use of high performance liquid chromatography. Clin.
Chem., in press.
|
| 10.
|
Kohlhepp, S. J.,
M. O. Loveless,
P. W. Kohnen,
D. C. Houghton,
W. M. Bennett, and D. N. Gilbert.
1984.
Nephrotoxicity of the constituents of gentamicin complex.
J. Infect. Dis.
149:605-614[Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Lin, J. H.
1995.
Species similarities and differences in pharmacokinetics.
Drug Metab. Disp.
24:1008-1021.
|
| 12.
|
Moerstrup, S. K.,
S. Cui,
H. Vorum,
C. Bregengard,
S. E. Bjorn,
K. Norris,
J. Gliemann, and E. I. Christenssen.
1995.
Evidence that epithelial glycoprotein 330/megalin mediates uptake of polybasic drugs.
J. Clin. Investig.
96:1404-1413.
|
| 13.
|
Mosegaard, A.,
P. G. Welling, and P. O. Madsen.
1975.
Gentamicin and gentamicin C1 in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections: comparative study of efficacy, tolerance, and pharmacokinetics.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
7:328-332[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Nakashima, E., and L. Z. Benet.
1988.
General treatment of mean residence time, clearance and volume parameters in linear mammillary models with elimination from any compartment.
J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm.
16:475-493[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Nicolau, D. P.,
C. D. Freeman,
P. P. Belliveau,
C. H. Nightingale,
J. W. Ross, and R. Quintiliani.
1995.
Experience with a once-daily aminoglycoside program administered to 2,184 adult patients.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
39:650-655[Abstract].
|
| 16.
|
Prins, J. M.,
H. R. Buller,
E. J. Kuijper,
R. A. Tange, and P. Speelman.
1993.
Once versus thrice daily gentamicin in patients with serious infections.
Lancet
341:335-339[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Riviere, J. E., and G. L. Coppoc.
1981.
Pharmacokinetics of gentamicin in juvenile dog.
Am. J. Vet. Res.
42:1621-1623[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Riviere, J. E.,
M. P. Carver,
G. L. Coppoc,
W. W. Carlton,
G. C. Lantz, and J. Shy-Modjeska.
1984.
Pharmacokinetics and comparative nephrotoxicity of fixed-dose versus fixed-interval reduction of gentamicin dosage in subtotal nephrectomized dogs.
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
75:496-509[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 19.
|
Rowland, M., and T. Tozer.
1995.
Clinical pharmacokinetics: concepts and applications, 3rd ed., p. 148.
Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, Pa.
|
| 20.
|
Schentag, J. J., and W. J. Jusko.
1977.
Renal clearance and tissue accumulation of gentamicin.
Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.
22:364-370[Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Schentag, J. J.,
W. J. Jusko,
J. W. Vance,
T. J. Cumbo,
E. Abrutyn,
M. DeLattre, and L. M. Gerbracht.
1977.
Gentamicin disposition and tissue accumulation on multiple dosing.
J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm.
5:559-577[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 22.
|
White, L. O.,
A. M. Lovering, and D. S. Reeves.
1983.
Variations in gentamicin C1, C1a, C2 and C2a content of some preparations of gentamicin sulfate used clinically as determined by high-performance liquid chromatography.
Ther. Drug Monit.
5:123-126[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
White, L. O.
1998.
Assays for therapeutic monitoring and pharmacokinetic investigations of aminoglycosides: quality aspects.
Ther. Drug Monit.
20:464-468[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Whittem, T.,
K. Parton, and K. Turner.
1996.
Effect of polyaspartic acid on pharmacokinetics of gentamicin after single intravenous dose in the dog.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
40:1237-1241[Abstract].
|
| 25.
|
Yamaoka, K.
1986.
Methods for pharmacokinetic analysis by personal computer, 2nd edn, p. 145-162.
Nanko-do Ltd., Tokyo, Japan.
|
| 26.
|
Yamaoka, K.,
T. Nakagawa, and T. Uno.
1978.
Statistical moments in pharmacokinetics.
J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm.
6:547-558[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 27.
|
Zaske, D. E.
1992.
Aminoglycosides, p. 14-1-14-47.
In
W. E. Ewans, J. J. Schentag, W. J. Jusko, and M. V. Relling (ed.), Applied pharmacokinetics, 3rd ed. Applied Therapeutics Inc., Vancouver, Wash.
|
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, June 2000, p. 1443-1447, Vol. 44, No. 6
0066-4804/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.