Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, July 2000, p. 1789-1795, Vol. 44, No. 7
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department
of Internal Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois,
1011 Lausanne, Switzerland,1 and
Rhône-Poulenc Rorer, F-92165 Antony Cedex,
France2
Received 2 August 1999/Returned for modification 23 September
1999/Accepted 29 March 2000
Quinupristin-dalfopristin (Q-D) is an injectable streptogramin
active against most gram-positive pathogens, including
methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In
experimental endocarditis, however, Q-D was less efficacious against
MRSA isolates constitutively resistant to
macrolide-lincosamide-streptogram B (C-MLSB) than against
MLSB-susceptible isolates. To circumvent this problem, we
used the checkerboard method to screen drug combinations that would
increase the efficacy of Q-D against such bacteria. Quinupristin-dalfopristin (Q-D) is a
new injectable streptogramin potent against most gram-positive
pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus
aureus (MRSA) and multidrug-resistant enterococci (4, 14, 15,
19). The two Q-D components bind synergistically to the 23S RNA
of the bacterial ribosome and thus confer efficacy against both
macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B (MLSB)-susceptible and MLSB-resistant bacteria (6, 20). However,
although both compounds are intrinsically active against
MLSB-susceptible S. aureus, the presence of a
second component, i.e., dalfopristin, is absolutely required for
efficacy against constitutively MLSB-resistant (C-MLSB) isolates (6). Since most MRSA in the
clinical environment are C-MLSB resistant (9,
25), this phenotype may pose a therapeutic challenge.
Potential problems with C-MLSB-resistant staphylococci were
first detected in early studies with animals (9, 12).
Indeed, while Q-D given two times a day (b.i.d.) was successful
treatment for rats with experimental endocarditis due to
MLSB-susceptible MRSA, it failed as therapy against
C-MLSB-resistant isolates (9). This correlated
with the short life span of dalfopristin in the serum, and therapeutic
efficacy could be restored by prolonging the presence of dalfopristin
in the blood by using a programmable infusion pump
(9; J. Vouillamoz, J. M. Entenza, M. P. Glauser, and P. Moreillon, Abstr. 36th Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob.
Agents Chemother., abstr. C91, p. 50, 1996). Moreover, experiments with the rabbit model of endocarditis indicated that dalfopristin did not
penetrate cardiac vegetations as well as quinupristin (13). Thus, adequate dalfopristin levels at the infection site were critical
for treatment efficacy.
To solve this problem one can either increase the Q-D dosage or seek
drug combinations that would decrease the need for Q-D to be effective.
First, an increase in the Q-D dosage was achieved in animals either by
augmenting the number of daily doses or by delivering the drug as a
continuous infusion. The two strategies improved the therapeutic
efficacy of Q-D (Vouillamoz et al., 36th ICAAC) and helped define newer
recommendations for Q-D administration to humans, which are now 7.5 mg/kg three times a day (t.i.d.) (18; J. Moses, E. Brown, W. Lynn, J. White, L. K. Goldberg and G. H. Talbot,
Abstr. 38th Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. abstr. MN-52,
p. 603, 1998) rather than 7 mg/kg b.i.d., as proposed earlier
(10).
Second, seeking synergistic drug combinations is a reasonable approach
that might help circumvent the risk of toxicity associated with dose
escalation. Previous studies indicated that exposure of staphylococci
to subinhibitory concentrations of Q-D yielded bacteria with very thick
and abnormal cell walls (22, 23). On the basis of this
observation, we hypothesized that concomitant treatment of
staphylococci with Q-D plus a second antibiotic that specifically
interferes with cell wall synthesis might result in a positive
interaction. Testing of this possibility was the very purpose of the
present experiments. First, the checkerboard method was used to test
combinations of Q-D with a variety of antibiotics with unrelated modes
of action against both MLSB-susceptible and
C-MLSB-resistant S. aureus isolates. Second,
selected drugs that interacted positively with Q-D were tested alone or
in combination with Q-D in rats with experimental endocarditis.
Microorganisms and growth conditions.
A panel of 8 clinical
isolates of methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) (4 MLSB-susceptible isolates and 4 C-MLSB-resistant isolates) and 10 MRSA isolates (5 MLSB-susceptible isolates and 5 C-MLSB-resistant isolates) that differed in their pulsed
field gel electrophoresis profiles (3) were tested for their
susceptibilities to both Q-D and unrelated antibiotics (see Table 1).
Two of these isolates, namely, isolates AW7 and P8, were further used
for experiments with animals. They were both C-MLSB
resistant and expressed heterogeneous resistance to methicillin
(9).
0066-4804/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Quinupristin-Dalfopristin Combined with
-Lactams for
Treatment of Experimental Endocarditis Due to Staphylococcus
aureus Constitutively Resistant to
Macrolide-Lincosamide-Streptogramin B Antibiotics
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
-Lactams consistently exhibited additive or synergistic activity with Q-D. Glycopeptides, quinolones, and aminoglycosides were indifferent. No
drugs were antagonistic. The positive Q-D-
-lactam interaction was
independent of MLSB or
-lactam resistance. Moreover,
addition of Q-D at one-fourth the MIC to flucloxacillin-containing
plates decreased the flucloxacillin MIC for MRSA from 500 to 1,000 mg/liter to 30 to 60 mg/liter. Yet, Q-D-
-lactam combinations were
not synergistic in bactericidal tests. Rats with aortic vegetations were infected with two C-MLSB-resistant MRSA isolates
(isolates AW7 and P8) and were treated for 3 or 5 days with drug
dosages simulating the following treatments in humans: (i) Q-D at 7 mg/kg two times a day (b.i.d.) (a relatively low dosage purposely used to help detect positive drug interactions), (ii) cefamandole at constant levels in serum of 30 mg/liter, (iii) cefepime at 2 g b.i.d., (iv) Q-D combined with either cefamandole or cefepime. Any of
the drugs used alone resulted in treatment failure. In contrast, Q-D
plus either cefamandole or cefepime significantly decreased valve
infection compared to the levels of infection for both untreated
controls and those that received monotherapy (P < 0.05). Importantly, Q-D prevented the growth of highly
-lactam-resistant MRSA in vivo. The mechanism of this beneficial
drug interaction is unknown. However, Q-D-
-lactam combinations
might be useful for the treatment of complicated infections caused by
multiple organisms, including MRSA.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
-lactam resistance by MRSA. Stocks were kept at
70°C in tryptic soy broth supplemented with 10% (vol/vol) glycerol.
Antibiotics and chemicals. Q-D (RP 59500), quinupristin, and dalfopristin were provided by Rhône-Poulenc Rorer (Antony, France); cefepime was provided by Bristol-Myers Squibb AG (Baar, Switzerland). All other drugs and chemicals were commercially available products.
Susceptibility testing and antibiotic interactions.
The
antibiotic MICs were determined by a previously described broth
macrodilution method (1) with a final inoculum of
105 to 106 CFU/ml. Antibiotic interactions were
assessed by the checkerboard method in 96-well microtiter plates
(Dynatech Microtiter, Chantilly, Va.) as described previously
(7). The wells were inoculated with 105 CFU/ml
from a logarithmic-phase culture, and the plates were incubated for
18 h at 35°C before visible bacterial growth was determined.
Fractional inhibitory concentration (FIC) indices were interpreted as
follows:
0.5 for drug synergism, >0.5 but
1 for additivity, >1
but
4 for indifference, and >4 for antagonism (7).
Population analysis profiles and time-kill curves.
The
phenotypic expression of
-lactam resistance was determined by
spreading large bacterial inocula (
109 CFU) as well as
appropriate dilutions onto NaCl-supplemented agar plates containing
twofold serial dilutions of antibiotics (24). In certain
experiments, the plates were supplemented with a constant subinhibitory
concentration (one-fourth the MIC) of Q-D to test the effect of this
drug on the expression of
-lactam resistance. The numbers of
colonies growing on the plates were enumerated after 48 h of
incubation at 35°C. The results were expressed by plotting the
numbers of colonies growing on the plates against the
-lactam
concentrations in the plates.
-lactams were used. Due to the
prolonged postantibiotic effect of Q-D, the plates were incubated for
at least 48 h before viable counts were obtained (5,
21).
Production of endocarditis and infusion pump installation. The production of aortic vegetations and the installation of a central jugular line (Dow Corning Corp., Midland, Mich.) and a programmable pump (Pump 44; Harvard Apparatus, Inc., South Natick, Mass.) to deliver the antibiotics were as described previously (16, 17). In certain experiments, Q-D was injected into the animals in combination with another drug. This necessitated the use of two infusion pumps (one for each drug) which were connected to a two-way swivel (BOC Ohmeda AB, Helsinborg, Sweden) and to two independent jugular lines. No intravenous (i.v.) lines were placed in the control animals.
Bacterial endocarditis was induced 24 h after catheterization by i.v. challenge of the animals with 0.5 ml of saline containing 105 CFU of the test bacteria. This inoculum was 10 times larger than the minimum inoculum that produced endocarditis in 90% of untreated controls.Therapy for experimental endocarditis. Treatment was started 12 h after bacterial challenge and lasted for 3 or 5 days. The antibiotics were delivered at changing flow rates to simulate the kinetics of the drugs in humans. The Q-D treatment simulated treatment with 7 mg/kg b.i.d. (every 12 h) (10). This was a lower daily dose than that from the t.i.d. regimen now proposed for this drug (18; Moses et al., 38th ICAAC; S. A. Nachman, A. Phillips, S. L. Gray, and G. H. Talbot, Abstr. 38th Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., abstr. E-167, p. 217, 1998) but helped detect positive drug interactions in the present experimental setting (see Results). Cefamandole was tested as a proof of concept, because it is one of the rare cephalosporins that has some activity against MRSA (24). It was administered as a continuous infusion that produced constant levels in serum of 30 mg/liter, which is one of the highest dosages that was given to a human (24). Cefepime was given to simulate i.v. treatment of humans with 2 g b.i.d. (2). This required a total amount of antibiotic (in milligrams per kilogram of body weight per 12 h) of ca. 38 mg of Q-D, 360 mg of cefamandole, and 142 mg of cefepime.
Determination of serum antibiotic concentrations. Concentrations of antibiotics in serum were determined in groups of four to nine uninfected or infected rats. Levels in the serum of infected animals came from an internal control for adequate drug delivery in therapeutic experiments. Blood was drawn by puncturing the periorbital sinuses. For Q-D, blood was acidified and processed as described previously (9). Micrococcus luteus ATCC 9341 was used as an indicator organism to measure the total Q-D activity. Individual quinupristin and dalfopristin concentrations were measured occasionally as described previously (9). Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6633 was used to titrate cefamandole and cefepime. Standard curves were constructed with pooled rat serum as the diluent, and the standard samples were acidified for Q-D titration as described above. The limits of detection for the assay were ca. 0.3 mg/liter for Q-D and cefamandole and 3 mg/liter for cefepime. The linearity of the standard curve was assessed by use of a regression coefficient of 0.998, and the coefficient of variation of the assay was consistently less than 10%.
Evaluation of infection.
Control rats were killed at
treatment onset (12 h after inoculation) in order to measure both the
frequency and the severity of valve infection at the start of therapy.
Treated rats were killed 12 h after the trough level after
administration of the last antibiotic dose was achieved, a time at
which no residual antibiotic could be detected in the blood. The
vegetations were dissected, weighed, homogenized in 1 ml of saline, and
serially diluted before being plated for colony counts. Quantitative
blood and spleen cultures were performed in parallel. Several animals died before the end of treatment due to either complications of the
operation (such as possible catheter-induced arrhythmia) or the
infective process. The blood and spleens from these animals were not
cultured. Only rats that had received at least two-thirds of the
treatment were taken into account for vegetation bacterial counts. The
numbers of colonies growing on the plates were determined after 48 h of incubation at 35°C. Bacterial densities in the vegetations were
expressed as log10 CFU per gram of tissue. The minimum
detection level was
2 log10 CFU/g of vegetation. For
statistical comparisons of differences between the vegetation bacterial
densities of various treatment groups, culture-negative vegetations
were considered to contain 2 log10 CFU/g.
Selection for antibiotic resistance in vitro an in vivo.
Highly
-lactam- and/or Q-D-resistant MRSA subpopulations were
assessed from an in vitro population analysis profile. Colonies growing
on drug-containing agar were enumerated after 48 h of incubation
at 35°C, and the MICs for these colonies were determined. The
emergence of resistance in vivo was evaluated by plating 0.1-ml portions from undiluted vegetation homogenates both on plain agar and
on agar supplemented with five times the MICs of the test antibiotics.
As described above, the MICs for bacteria growing on
antibiotic-containing plates were redetermined in liquid media. The in
vivo screening was performed only for Q-D and cefepime.
Statistical analysis.
The median bacterial densities in the
vegetations of various treatment groups were compared by the
nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance on ranks,
with subsequent pairwise multiple comparison procedures done by Dunn's
method. The differences in mortality rates were analyzed by the
2 test with Yates' correction. Overall, differences
were considered significant when P was
0.05 by use of
two-tailed significance levels.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Antibiotic susceptibility and FIC indices.
Table
1 presents the MICs of several
antibiotics for the 8 MSSA and 10 MRSA isolates used in vitro. Figure
1 presents the FIC indices of Q-D
combined with other antibiotics for these bacteria. As can be seen, Q-D
demonstrated either additive activity (FIC index, between 0.5 and 1) or
synergistic activity (FIC index,
0.5) with all the
-lactams and
with tetracycline. FIC indices were not affected either by
MLSB resistance or by
-lactam resistance. Combinations
of Q-D with other antibiotics were indifferent (FIC indices, >1 but
4). No antagonism (FIC index, >4) was observed.
|
|
Population analysis profile and time-kill experiments.
Figure
2 presents the population analysis
profiles determined on agar plates that contained either flucloxacillin
(Fig. 2A and C) or cefepime (Fig. 2B and D) and that were supplemented or not with one-fourth the MIC of Q-D. In the absence of Q-D, both MRSA
grew on plates that contained up to 1,000 mg of the
-lactams per
liter. In the presence of subinhibitory Q-D concentrations, on the
other hand, neither of the organisms grew on plates containing
30 mg
of flucloxacillin per liter or
60 mg of cefepime per liter. This
bacteriostatic synergism was in accordance with the FIC indices (Fig.
1) and was also supported by a recent report that indicated that
non-cell wall inhibitors, including Q-D, could affect the expression of
-lactam resistance by MRSA (26).
|
-lactams and staphylococci presented in Fig. 1 (J. Vouillamoz,
J. M. Entenza, M. Giddey, M. P. Glauser, and P. Moreillon,
Abstr. 36th Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., abstr. E7,
p. 82, 1996).
|
-lactam
combinations was also observed with other
-lactams and other
staphylococcal isolates (Vouillamoz et al., 36th ICAAC). To clarify the
potential relevance of these effects in vivo, Q-D was used alone or in
combination with cefamandole or cefepime to treat rats with
experimental MRSA endocarditis.
Concentrations of antibiotics in serum of rats. Q-D concentrations in serum were 5 mg/liter at 1 h after treatment onset, 2 mg/liter after 2 h, 0.7 mg/liter after 4 h, and below the level of detection after 6 h, as measured by the global bioassay (9). Cefamandole was given continuously to produce constant concentrations of 30 mg/liter, as described previously (24). Cefepime concentrations were 166.2 ± 18.8 mg/liter at 0.5 h after treatment onset, 62.8 ± 10.7 mg/liter after 2 h, 47.3 ± 9.8 mg/liter after 4 h, and 7.1 ± 3.3 mg/liter after 12 h (2). These concentrations encompassed the genuine in vivo dynamic between the peak and trough antibiotic concentrations tested in vitro.
Efficacy of Q-D alone or in combination with cefamandole or
cefepime in the treatment of experimental endocarditis.
Figure
4 depicts the therapeutic results with
Q-D and cefamandole against infection due to MRSA AW7. Both drugs used
alone failed to cure the animals. Bacteria even continued to grow in spite of antibiotic treatment. In sharp contrast, Q-D plus cefamandole progressively reduced the bacterial densities in the vegetations. After
3 days, this reduction was statistically significant (P < 0.05) compared to the densities in the vegetations of rats treated with Q-D or cefamandole alone but not compared to those in animals killed at treatment onset (P > 0.05). After 5 days, on
the other hand, combination therapy had significantly (P < 0.05) decreased the vegetation bacterial titers compared to those
for both of these control groups.
|
|
Mortality, blood cultures, and spleen cultures.
The
spontaneous mortality in these experiments was high, reaching 30 to
40% at 3 days and 60 to 80% at 5 days. However, mortality did not
vary among the various treatments groups and thus was instead due to
the complex experimental setting. When pooled together, the specific
5-day mortality rate in the experiments whose results are depicted in
Fig. 4 and 5 was 13 of 21 (61%) rats in the cephalosporin monotherapy
groups, 20 of 23 (86%) rats in the Q-D monotherapy group, and 25 of 36 (69%) rats in the Q-D-cephalosporin treatment groups (P > 0.05 when the results were compared by the
2 test
with Yates' correction).
1,000 CFU/ml. In
contrast, only 4 of 11 (36%) rats treated with the drug combinations
had positive blood cultures, which contained a median of only 12 CFU/ml
(range, 1 to 100 CFU/ml).
Similar observations were made with the spleens. At treatment onset,
the spleens of 18 of 18 (100%) control animals were positive by
culture, growing a median of 1,000 CFU/g of tissue (range, 120 to
1,000 CFU/g of tissue). At the end of treatment, all animals that
received single-drug therapy had similar bacterial densities in the
spleens. In comparison, the spleens of only 4 of 11 rats that received
combination therapy were positive by culture, containing a median of 56 CFU/g of tissue (range, 3 to 128 CFU/g of tissue). While these numbers
are only indicative, they clearly underline the effect of combination
therapy compared to the control.
Selection of antibiotic resistance.
In vitro population
analysis profiles determined with cefepime and MRSA AW7 and P8
indicated that the frequency of highly resistant subpopulations
(defined by growth on
50 mg of cefepime per liter) was
10
4 (Fig. 2). In contrast, similar experiments
performed with Q-D showed a sharp decrease in bacterial growth with the
drug at between 0.15 and 0.3 mg/liter and no residual bacterial growth
with the drug at 0.6 mg/liter. This was below the 1-mg/liter
susceptibility breakpoint of the drug.
128 mg/liter. On
the other hand, the valve of only one of the five rats (20%) in the
Q-D-cefepime group with positive valve cultures grew derivatives for
which the cefepime MIC was increased five or more times. Therefore, as
observed in vitro, Q-D tended to impede the outgrowth of highly
-lactam-resistant MRSA subpopulations in vivo as well.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The present study investigated the potential benefit of combining
Q-D with
-lactams in vitro and in rats with experimental endocarditis. The rationale for testing such drug associations was
based on previous work by Lorian et al. (21, 22), who observed that staphylococci exposed to subinhibitory concentrations of
Q-D produced very thick, abnormal cell walls. Thus, use of a
combination of a drug that produces abnormal cell wall accumulation with drugs that inhibit cell wall assembly might result in some kind of
cooperative antibacterial effect. Moreover, one in vitro study and one
in vivo study suggested that this assumption might be correct (11,
26).
The present results confirmed the beneficial Q-D-
-lactam
interaction against several MRSA strains. In contrast, this beneficial interaction was less obvious with other classes of antibiotics, except
maybe for tetracycline, which might interact with Q-D at the ribosome
level. A striking observation was that subinhibitory Q-D concentrations
could prevent the outgrowth of highly
-lactam-resistant MRSA, as
determined from population analysis profiles. This phenomenon could
have practical implications because Q-D might decrease the MICs of
certain
-lactams for MRSA to concentrations that can be achieved
during standard therapy in human.
One may only speculate on the mechanism(s) of this interaction. In a
recent study, Sieradzki and Tomasz (26) observed that several non-
-lactam antibiotics could affect the expression of methicillin resistance by MRSA. This suggested that exposure of bacteria to certain non-cell wall inhibitors might have deleterious repercussions on the cell wall building machinery. Likewise, we recently observed that exposure of MRSA to subinhibitory concentrations of Q-D affected the compositions of their walls, as determined by
high-pressure liquid chromatography (J. Vouillamoz, P. A. Majcherczyk, H. Nadler, M. Giddey, M. P. Glauser, and P. Moreillon, Abstr. 39th Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.,
abstr. 1260, p. 262, 1999). This phenomenon was also observed to a
lesser extent with erythromycin but not with other ribosome inhibitors
such as tetracycline and gentamicin (Vouillamoz et al., 39th ICAAC). Hence, it is possible that the dual interference of certain non-cell wall inhibitors and cell wall-acting drugs on peptidoglycan assembly might have potentiating effects.
While the positive bacteriostatic interaction between Q-D and
-lactams was detected at low concentrations, higher drug doses suggested a possible antagonism in time-kill experiments. This was
reminiscent of the bactericidal interference between protein inhibitors
and cell wall-active antibiotics and raised the question of its
relevance in vivo. Most interestingly, however, this antagonism did not
prevail in rats with experimental endocarditis. Indeed, Q-D combined
with either cefamandole or cefepime significantly decreased vegetation
bacterial titers and even resulted in negative valve cultures, even
though the
-lactams were given at quasimaximal doses and the Q-D
concentration fluctuated between the peak and trough concentrations
tested in vitro. This in vitro-in vivo dissociation might be explained
by the constant variation in drug concentrations at the infected site
in animals. Note that the present experiments did not test definitive
cure, as relapses were not evaluated in animals kept for a prolonged
duration after the end of treatment. However, the significant decrease
in vegetation bacterial titers conferred by the combination treatment
clearly indicated its superiority over that of a single-drug therapy.
Another important question was the risk of resistance selection. In the
present experiments, Q-D used alone did not select for derivatives for
which MICs were increased either in vitro or in vivo. Moreover, Q-D
could prevent the growth of highly
-lactam-resistant subpopulations
in vitro, and also hindered
but did not entirely prevent
the
overgrowth of highly cefepime-resistant subpopulations in vivo.
Therefore, resistance selection was not a major issue in this
particular experimental setting.
Taken together, the present study underlines the beneficial effect of
Q-D-
-lactam combinations against C-MLSB-resistant MRSA. The observation was valid both in vitro and in rats with experimental endocarditis, indicating that the finding held true when testing was
done in the complicated context of in vivo therapy. The mechanism of
this beneficial interaction has yet to be determined. Nevertheless, the
present experiments with MRSA, as well as previous experiments with
Q-D-ampicillin against experimental endocarditis due to
MLSB-resistant Enterococcus faecium
(11), support the potential usefulness of this strategy.
Moreover, it is now suggested that Q-D be administered t.i.d. rather
than b.i.d. for the treatment of severe infections (18; Moses et al., 38th ICAAC; Nachman et al., 38th
ICAAC), thus adding to the therapeutic margin of the compound. In this context, the present observations indicate that Q-D plus the
broad-spectrum cefepime could be of use, for instance, for treatment of
severely ill patients who require multiple-antibiotic therapy.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Marlyse Giddey and Dominique Blanc for outstanding technical assistance and the Rhône-Poulenc Rorer working group on the Q-D animal models (Harriette Nadler, Michael Dowzicky, Guy Montay, Philippe Picaut, Nadine Berthaud, and Céline Féger) for stimulating discussions.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland. Phone: 41-21-314.10.26. Fax: 41-21-314.10.36. E-mail: pmoreill{at}chuv.hospvd.ch.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Amsterdam, D. 1996. Susceptibility testing of antimicrobials in liquid media, p. 52-111. In V. Lorian (ed.), Antibiotics in laboratory medicine. The Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, Md. |
| 2. |
Barbhaiya, R. H.,
S. T. Forgue,
C. R. Gleason,
C. A. Knupp,
K. A. Pittman,
D. J. Weidler,
H. Movahhed,
J. Tenney, and R. R. Martin.
1992.
Pharmacokinetics of cefepime after single and multiple intravenous administrations in healthy subjects.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
36:552-557 |
| 3. | Blanc, D. S., C. Petignat, P. Moreillon, J. M. Entenza, M. C. Eisenring, H. Kleiber, A. Wenger, N. Troillet, C. H. Blanc, and P. Francioli. 1999. Unusual spread of a penicillin-susceptible methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clone in a geographic area of low incidence. Clin. Infect. Dis. 29:1512-1518[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 4. | Brumfitt, W., J. M. Hamilton-Miller, and S. Shah. 1992. In-vitro activity of RP 59500, a new semisynthetic streptogramin antibiotic, against gram-positive bacteria. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 30(Suppl. A):29-37. |
| 5. | Chin, N. X., and H. C. Neu. 1992. Post-antibiotic effect of the new streptogramin RP 59500. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 11:642-645[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 6. |
Cocito, C.,
M. Di Giambattista,
E. Nyssen, and P. Vannuffel.
1997.
Inhibition of protein synthesis by streptogramins and related antibiotics.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
39(Suppl. A):7-13 |
| 7. | Eliopoulos, G. M., and R. C. Moellering, Jr. 1996. Antimicrobial combinations, p. 330-396. In V. Lorian (ed.), Antibiotics in laboratory medicine. The Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, Md. |
| 8. |
Entenza, J.,
O. Marchetti,
M. P. Glauser, and P. Moreillon.
1998.
Y-688, a new quinolone active against quinolone-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: lack of in vivo efficacy in experimental endocarditis.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
42:1889-1894 |
| 9. | Entenza, J. M., H. Drugeon, M. P. Glauser, and P. Moreillon. 1995. Treatment of experimental endocarditis due to erythromycin-susceptible or -resistant methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with RP 59500. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 39:1419-1424[Abstract]. |
| 10. | Etienne, S. D., G. Montay, A. Le Liboux, A. Frydman, and J. J. Garaud. 1992. A phase I, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the tolerance and pharmacokinetic behaviour of RP 59500. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 30(Suppl. A):123-131. |
| 11. | Fantin, B., R. Leclercq, L. Garry, and C. Carbon. 1997. Influence of inducible cross-resistance to macrolides, lincosamides, and streptogramin B-type antibiotics in Enterococcus faecium on activity of quinupristin-dalfopristin in vitro and in rabbits with experimental endocarditis. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 41:931-935[Abstract]. |
| 12. |
Fantin, B.,
R. Leclercq,
Y. Merle,
L. Saint-Julien,
C. Veyrat,
J. Duval, and C. Carbon.
1995.
Critical influence of resistance to streptogramin B-type antibiotics on activity of RP 59500 (quinupristin-dalfopristin) in experimental endocarditis due to Staphylococcus aureus.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
39:400-405 |
| 13. |
Fantin, B.,
R. Leclercq,
M. Ottaviani,
J. M. Vallois,
B. Maziere,
J. Duval,
J. J. Pocidalo, and C. Carbon.
1994.
In vivo activities and penetration of the two components of the streptogramin RP 59500 in cardiac vegetations of experimental endocarditis.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
38:432-437 |
| 14. |
Fass, R. J.
1991.
In vitro activity of RP 59500, a semisynthetic injectable pristinamycin, against staphylococci, streptococci, and enterococci.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
35:553-559 |
| 15. | Finch, R. G. 1996. Antibacterial activity of quinupristin/dalfopristin. Rationale for clinical use. Drugs 51(Suppl. 1):31-37. |
| 16. | Fluckiger, U., P. Francioli, J. Blaser, M. P. Glauser, and P. Moreillon. 1994. Role of amoxicillin serum levels for successful prophylaxis of experimental endocarditis due to tolerant streptococci. J. Infect. Dis. 169:1397-1400[Medline]. |
| 17. |
Heraief, E.,
M. P. Glauser, and L. R. Freedman.
1982.
Natural history of aortic valve endocarditis in rats.
Infect. Immun.
37:127-131 |
| 18. |
Johnson, C. A.,
C. A. Taylor III,
S. W. Zimmerman,
W. E. Bridson,
P. Chevalier,
O. Pasquier, and R. I. Baybutt.
1999.
Pharmacokinetics of quinupristin-dalfopristin in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
43:152-156 |
| 19. | Jones, R. N., C. H. Ballow, D. J. Biedenbach, J. A. Deinhart, and J. J. Schentag. 1998. Antimicrobial activity of quinupristin-dalfopristin (RP 59500, Synercid) tested against over 28,000 recent clinical isolates from 200 medical centers in the United States and Canada. Diag. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 31:437-451[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 20. |
Leclercq, R.,
L. Nantas,
C. J. Soussy, and J. Duval.
1992.
Activity of RP 59500, a new parenteral semisynthetic streptogramin, against staphylococci with various mechanisms of resistance to macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin antibiotics.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
30(Suppl. A):67-75 |
| 21. | Lorian, V., L. Amaral, and F. Fernandes. 1995. RP 59500 postantibiotic effect defined by bacterial ultrastructure. Drugs Exp. Clin. Res. 21:125-128[Medline]. |
| 22. |
Lorian, V.,
Y. Esanu, and L. Amaral.
1994.
Ultrastructure alterations of Staphylococcus aureus exposed to RP59500.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
33:625-628 |
| 23. |
Lorian, V., and F. Fernandes.
1999.
Electron microscopy studies of the bactericidal effects of quinupristin/dalfopristin on Staphylococcus aureus.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
43:845-848 |
| 24. | Que, Y. A., J. M. Entenza, P. Francioli, and P. Moreillon. 1998. The impact of penicillinase on cefamandole treatment and prophylaxis of experimental endocarditis due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J. Infect. Dis. 177:146-154[Medline]. |
| 25. |
Scheel, O.,
D. J. Lyon,
V. T. Rosdahl,
F. A. Adeyemi-Doro,
T. K. Ling, and A. F. Cheng.
1996.
In-vitro susceptibility of isolates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus 1988-1993.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
37:243-251 |
| 26. |
Sieradzki, K., and A. Tomasz.
1997.
Suppression of beta-lactam antibiotic resistance in a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus through synergic action of early cell wall inhibitors and some other antibiotics.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
39(Suppl. A):47-51 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Clin. Vaccine Immunol. | Clin. Microbiol. Rev. |
|---|---|
| J. Clin. Microbiol. | ALL ASM JOURNALS |