This Article
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 Sommers, D K
Right arrow Articles by Harding, S M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sommers, D K
Right arrow Articles by Harding, S M

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984 March; 25(3): 344-347

Pharmacokinetics and tolerance of cefuroxime axetil in volunteers during repeated dosing.

D K Sommers, M Van Wyk, P E Williams and S M Harding

ABSTRACT

A total of 158 volunteers each received 21 repeated oral doses of 500 mg of cefuroxime axetil (CAE) during four comparative cross-over trials. Pharmacokinetics were studied in 8 volunteers (CAE versus ampicillin), relative bioavailability and tolerance were studied in 100 volunteers (CAE versus pivmecillinam and CAE versus pivampicillin), and tolerance alone was studied in 50 volunteers (CAE versus ampicillin). Overall, urinary recoveries of the active antibiotics ranked absorption of the drugs in the order least to greatest: pivmecillinam, ampicillin, CAE, and pivampicillin. The pharmacokinetics of CAE and ampicillin did not change after repeated dosing. Peak serum levels of cefuroxime were significantly higher than those of ampicillin after doses 1 and 21 but the urinary recoveries of both antibiotics were around 35% of the dose. CAE was as well tolerated as ampicillin but there were smaller numbers of episodes of fluid bowel motions on pivmecillinam and pivampicillin than on CAE, which may have been due to the smaller amounts of active antibiotic in the doses of the pivaloyloxymethyl esters.


Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984 March; 25(3): 344-347




This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Gonzalez, N., Aguilar, L., Alou, L., Gimenez, M.-J., Sevillano, D., Torrico, M., Cafini, F., Coronel, P., Prieto, J. (2009). Influence of different resistance traits on the competitive growth of Haemophilus influenzae in antibiotic-free medium and selection of resistant populations by different {beta}-lactams: an in vitro pharmacodynamic approach. J Antimicrob Chemother 63: 1215-1222 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Alou, L., Gimenez, M. J., Sevillano, D., Aguilar, L., Gonzalez, N., Echeverria, O., Torrico, M., Coronel, P., Prieto, J. (2007). Are {beta}-lactam breakpoints adequate to define non-susceptibility for all Haemophilus influenzae resistance phenotypes from a pharmacodynamic point of view?. J Antimicrob Chemother 59: 652-657 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Grunder, G., Zysset-Aschmann, Y., Vollenweider, F., Maier, T., Krahenbuhl, S., Drewe, J. (2006). Lack of Pharmacokinetic Interaction between Linezolid and Antacid in Healthy Volunteers. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 50: 68-72 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Ison, C A, Mouton, J W, Jones, K, on behalf of the North Thames Audit Group, , Fenton, K A, Livermore, D M (2004). Which cephalosporin for gonorrhoea?. Sex. Transm. Infect. 80: 386-388 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Sydnor, A. Jr, Gwaltney, J. M. Jr, Cocchetto, D. M., Scheld, W. M. (1989). Comparative Evaluation of Cefuroxime Axetil and Cefaclor for Treatment of Acute Bacterial Maxillary Sinusitis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 115: 1430-1433 [Abstract]  
  • Schleupner, C. J., Anthony, W. C., Tan, J., File, T. M., Lifland, P., Craig, W., Vogelman, B. (1988). Blinded Comparison of Cefuroxime to Cefaclor for Lower Respiratory Tract Infections. Arch Intern Med 148: 343-348 [Abstract]