Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Susceptibility

Bactericidal Activity of Quinupristin-Dalfopristin against Staphylococcus aureus: Clindamycin Susceptibility as a Surrogate Indicator

Peter C. Fuchs, Arthur L. Barry, Steven D. Brown
Peter C. Fuchs
The Clinical Microbiology Institute, Wilsonville, Oregon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Arthur L. Barry
The Clinical Microbiology Institute, Wilsonville, Oregon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steven D. Brown
The Clinical Microbiology Institute, Wilsonville, Oregon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.44.10.2880-2882.2000
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Of 516 Staphylococcus aureus strains tested, 97.1% were susceptible to quinupristin-dalfopristin, which was bactericidal for 22 (56%) of the 39 strains tested, comparable to vancomycin. All 17 clindamycin and macrolide-resistant strains were inhibited but not killed by quinupristin-dalfopristin, whereas all 22 clindamycin-susceptible strains (5 were macrolide resistant) were killed.

Quinupristin-dalfopristin is a parenteral streptogramin composed of quinupristin (a streptogramin B antibiotic) and dalfopristin (a streptogramin A antibiotic) in a 30:70 ratio (13). This combination has been shown to exhibit synergistic in vitro antibacterial activity against staphylococci and other gram-positive bacteria (17). Greater than 90% ofStaphylococcus aureus isolates have been reported to be susceptible to quinupristin-dalfopristin at ≤1.0 μg/ml (1, 3, 7, 10, 14, 17, 18), and this activity was not appreciably affected by methicillin resistance (1, 3, 17, 18) or quinolone resistance (1, 10). Although nearly all S. aureus strains are inhibited by quinupristin-dalfopristin, the bactericidal activity of this drug is much more variable (3, 6, 9). Previous studies have shown that S. aureus strains that have cross-resistance to macrolides, lincosamides, and streptogramin B antibiotics (MLSB) were not killed in vitro by quinupristin-dalfopristin, nor did endocarditis in experimental animals due to such strains respond to quinupristin-dalfopristin therapy (5). Low quinupristin MICs were demonstrated to be predictive of quinupristin-dalfopristin bactericidal activity against staphylococci, and routine testing of quinupristin MICs was suggested for this reason (5). Since adding quinupristin to routine gram-positive susceptibility test panels would be a major step, it would be of interest to know whether susceptibility to clindamycin or erythromycin might be equally predictive of quinupristin-dalfopristin bactericidal activity. Thus, the present study was designed to determine the correlation between the bactericidal activity of quinupristin-dalfopristin and the MICs of quinupristin-dalfopristin, quinupristin, dalfopristin, erythromycin, and clindamycin.

Quinupristin, dalfopristin, and quinupristin-dalfopristin were provided by Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, Collegeville, Pa. Clindamycin, erythromycin, oxacillin, and vancomycin were procured from other commercial sources.

Broth microdilution tests (15) with 516 recent clinical isolates of S. aureus compared the bacteriostatic activities of quinupristin-dalfopristin, erythromycin, and clindamycin. The results are summarized in Table 1. Nearly all S. aureus strains were susceptible to quinupristin-dalfopristin, but macrolide resistance was not uncommon, especially among methicillin-resistant S. aureus strains. All strains were susceptible to vancomycin. From that series of 516 isolates, 39 strains were selected to provide roughly equal numbers of strains susceptible and resistant to methicillin, erythromycin, and clindamycin. These 39 strains were then tested by the broth microdilution method for susceptibility to quinupristin and dalfopristin alone, as well as quinupristin-dalfopristin, erythromycin, clindamycin, vancomycin, and oxacillin (with 2% NaCl).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Susceptibility of 516 recent clinical S. aureus isolates to four antibiotics

Time-kill tests were performed with quinupristin-dalfopristin and vancomycin (as the control drug) following the principles outlined by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (16). The drug concentrations used in these studies were 10 μg/ml for quinupristin-dalfopristin and 20 μg/ml for vancomycin. For both drugs, these concentrations were 10 to 40 times their MICs for the organisms tested but were equivalent to readily achievable blood levels with standard dosing (2, 4, 8). The initial inocula were targeted to be 1.5 × 106 CFU/ml. Colony counts were performed on the control suspension (no antibiotic) at time zero and on the control and both antibiotic suspensions at 1, 3, 6, 8, and 12 h. A drug was considered bactericidal if it produced a ≥3-log10 reduction in colony counts during this incubation period (≥99.9% killing).

Figure 1 provides examples of typical time-kill curves achieved with quinupristin-dalfopristin and vancomycin. When both drugs were bactericidal (Fig. 1A), the time required to achieve ≥99.9% killing was generally 2 to 6 h shorter for quinupristin-dalfopristin than for vancomycin. That is consistent with the findings of Hoban et al. (9). Overall, quinupristin-dalfopristin was bactericidal for 56% of our 39 selected strains and vancomycin was bactericidal for 64% of these isolates.

Fig. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Kill curves for four strains of methicillin-resistantS. aureus (MRSA) for which both drugs were bactericidal (A) vancomycin was bactericidal but quinupristin-dalfopristin (Quin/Dalfo) was not (B); quinupristin-dalfopristin was bactericidal but vancomycin was not (C); and neither drug was bactericidal (D).

The MICs of dalfopristin ranged from 2.0 to 16 μg/ml, with 35 (90%) of the dalfopristin MICs being 4.0 or 8.0 μg/ml. MICs of dalfopristin could not predict the bactericidal activity of quinupristin-dalfopristin. However, quinupristin MICs did correlate well with clindamycin MICs and with the bactericidal activity of quinupristin-dalfopristin (Table 2). Quinupristin-dalfopristin was bactericidal for all clindamycin-susceptible isolates, including the five that were erythromycin resistant. Furthermore, none of the clindamycin-resistant strains were killed by quinupristin-dalfopristin. With one exception, isolates for which the quinupristin MICs were ≤16 μg/ml were clindamycin susceptible and were killed by quinupristin-dalfopristin and those for which the quinupristin MICs were ≥32 μg/ml were not. The one exception was a clindamycin-resistant isolate for which the quinupristin MIC was 8.0 μg/ml that was not killed by quinupristin-dalfopristin. Although the quinupristin MICs were ≤16 μg/ml for all clindamycin-susceptible strains, the geometric mean quinupristin MIC for those strains that were erythromycin resistant was higher (8.0 μg/ml) than for those that were erythromycin susceptible (3.0 μg/ml). However, quinupristin-dalfopristin was bactericidal for both phenotypes.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Susceptibility patterns of 39 S. aureusstrains when divided by clindamycin and erythromycin susceptibility phenotype

These data confirm the observation that MLSB-resistant strains of S. aureus are not killed by quinupristin-dalfopristin (5). Furthermore, the data strongly suggest that clindamycin susceptibility is a good surrogate indicator of quinupristin-dalfopristin in vitro bactericidal activity; MICs of quinupristin alone may also serve as a useful surrogate. Since clindamycin is a common component of gram-positive susceptibility test panels, it may provide useful information for the clinical laboratory in this regard. It should be noted, however, that there are multiple mechanisms of MLSB resistance among staphylococci (11), and these were not determined for the isolates studied here. The ermA gene is by far the most prevalent determinant of MLSB resistance in S. aureus (12), and it is reasonable to assume that the majority, if not all, of our MLSB-resistant strains resulted from this determinant. Whether other determinants of MLSB resistance would yield similar results remains to be determined.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by a financial grant from Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, Collegeville, Pa.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 13 March 2000.
    • Returned for modification 7 June 2000.
    • Accepted 26 July 2000.
  • Copyright © 2000 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Archer G. L.,
    2. Auger P.,
    3. Doern G. V.,
    4. Ferraro M. J.,
    5. Fuchs P. C.,
    6. Jorgensen J. H.,
    7. Low D. E.,
    8. Murray P. R.,
    9. Reller L. B.,
    10. Stratton C. W.,
    11. Wennersten C. B.,
    12. Moellering R. C. Jr.
    RP-59500, a new streptogramin, highly active against recent isolates of North American staphylococci. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 16 1993 223 226
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Bergeron M.,
    2. Montay G.
    The pharmacokinetics of quinupristin/dalfopristin in laboratory animals and in humans. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 39 (Suppl. A) 1997 129 138
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.↵
    1. Brumfitt W.,
    2. Hamilton-Miller J. M. T.,
    3. Shah S.
    In vitro activity of RP 59500, a new semisynthetic streptogramin antibiotic, against Gram-positive bacteria. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 30 (Suppl. A) 1992 29 37
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Etienne S. D.,
    2. Montay G.,
    3. Le Liboux A.,
    4. Frydman A.,
    5. Garaud J. J.
    A phase I, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the tolerance and pharmacokinetic behaviour of RP 59500. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 30 (Suppl. A) 1992 123 131
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Fantin B.,
    2. Leclercq R.,
    3. Merle Y.,
    4. Saint-Julien L.,
    5. Veyrat C.,
    6. Duval J.,
    7. Carbon C.
    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 1995 400 405
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Fass R. J.
    In vitro activity of RP 59500, a semisynthetic injectable pristinamycin, against staphylococci, streptococci, and enterococci. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 35 1991 553 559
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Goto S.,
    2. Miyazaki S.,
    3. Kaneko Y.
    The in vitro activity of RP 59500 against Gram-positive cocci. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 30 (Suppl. A) 1992 25 28
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Griswold M. W.,
    2. Lomaestro B. M.,
    3. Briceland L. L.
    Quinupristin-dalfopristin (RP 59500): an injectable streptogramin combination. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 53 1996 2045 2053
    OpenUrlAbstract
  9. 9.↵
    1. Hoban D. J.,
    2. Weshnoweski B.,
    3. Palatnick L.,
    4. Zhanel C. G.,
    5. Davidson R. J.
    In vitro activity of streptogramin RP 59500 against staphylococci including bacterial kinetic studies. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 30 (Suppl. A) 1992 59 65
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Jones M. E.,
    2. Visser M. R.,
    3. Klootwijk M.,
    4. Heisig P.,
    5. Verhoef J.,
    6. Schmitz F.-J.
    Comparative activities of clinafloxacin, grepafloxacin, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, ofloxacin, sparfloxacin, and trovafloxacin and nonquinolones linozelid, quinupristin-dalfopristin, gentamicin, and vancomycin against clinical isolates of ciprofloxacin-resistant and -susceptible Staphylococcus aureus strains. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43 1999 421 423
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Leclercq R.,
    2. Nantas L.,
    3. Soussy C. J.,
    4. Duval J.
    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) 1992 67 75
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. 12.↵
    1. Lina G.,
    2. Quaglia A.,
    3. Reverdy M.,
    4. Leclercq R.,
    5. Vandenesch F.,
    6. Etienne J.
    Distribution of genes encoding resistance to macrolides, lincosamides, and streptogramins among staphylococci. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43 1999 1062 1066
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Low D. E.
    Quinupristin/dalfopristin: spectrum of activity, pharmacokinetics, and initial clinical experience. Microb. Drug Resist. 1 1995 223 234
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  14. 14.↵
    1. Low D. E.,
    2. Nadler H. L.
    A review of in-vitro antibacterial activity of quinupristin/dalfopristin against methicillin-susceptible and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 39 (Suppl. A) 1997 53 58
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.↵
    National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically, 4th ed. Approved standard M7-A4. 1997 National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards Wayne, Pa
  16. 16.↵
    National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards Methods for determining bactericidal activity of antimicrobial agents. Proposed guideline M26-P. 1987 National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards Wayne, Pa
  17. 17.↵
    1. Neu H. C.,
    2. Chin N.,
    3. Gu J.
    The in vitro activity of new streptogramins, RP 59500, RP57669, and RP 54476, alone and in combination. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 30 (Suppl. A) 1992 83 94
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Pechère J. C.
    In vitro activity of RP 59500, a semisynthetic streptogramin, against staphylococci and streptococci. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 30 (Suppl. A) 1992 15 18
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Bactericidal Activity of Quinupristin-Dalfopristin against Staphylococcus aureus: Clindamycin Susceptibility as a Surrogate Indicator
Peter C. Fuchs, Arthur L. Barry, Steven D. Brown
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Oct 2000, 44 (10) 2880-2882; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.44.10.2880-2882.2000

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Bactericidal Activity of Quinupristin-Dalfopristin against Staphylococcus aureus: Clindamycin Susceptibility as a Surrogate Indicator
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Bactericidal Activity of Quinupristin-Dalfopristin against Staphylococcus aureus: Clindamycin Susceptibility as a Surrogate Indicator
Peter C. Fuchs, Arthur L. Barry, Steven D. Brown
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Oct 2000, 44 (10) 2880-2882; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.44.10.2880-2882.2000
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

clindamycin
Drug Therapy, Combination
Staphylococcus aureus
Virginiamycin

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AAC
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • AAC Podcast
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AACJournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0066-4804; Online ISSN: 1098-6596