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

Postantibiotic Effects of Telavancin against 16 Gram-Positive Organisms

G. A. Pankuch, P. C. Appelbaum
G. A. Pankuch
Department of Pathology, Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania 17033
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P. C. Appelbaum
Department of Pathology, Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania 17033
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: pappelbaum@psu.edu
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01244-08
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

The in vitro postantibiotic effects (PAEs), postantibiotic sub-MIC effects (PA-SMEs), and sub-MIC effects of telavancin were determined for 16 gram-positive organisms. Telavancin staphylococcal, streptococcal, and enterococcal PAE ranges were 0.9 to 3.9 h, 0.4 to 6.7 h, and 0.3 to 2.2 h, respectively. The PA-SME ranges (0.4 times the MIC) for staphylococci, streptococci, and enterococci were 6.7 to >10.7 h, >10.7 to >11.0 h, and >10 to >10.8 h, respectively. The extended PAE of telavancin, together with its long elimination half-life in humans, supports once-daily dosing for this investigational drug.

The postantibiotic effect (PAE) is a pharmacodynamic parameter that may be considered in choosing antibiotic dosing regimens. It is defined as the length of time that bacterial growth is suppressed following brief exposure to an antibiotic (1, 3, 4). Odenholt-Tornqvist and coworkers (10, 11) have suggested that during intermittent dosage regimens, suprainhibitory levels of antibiotic are followed by subinhibitory levels that persist between doses and have hypothesized that persistent subinhibitory levels could extend the PAE. The effect of sub-MICs on growth during the PAE period has been defined as the postantibiotic sub-MIC effect (PA-SME), representing the time interval that includes the PAE plus the additional time during which growth is suppressed by sub-MIC. In contrast to the PA-SME, the sub-MIC effect (SME) represents the direct effect of subinhibitory levels on cultures which have not been previously exposed to antibiotics (10, 11).

Telavancin is an investigational bactericidal lipoglycopeptide antibiotic that possesses potent activity against gram-positive pathogens, including those which display lower susceptibility to vancomycin (5-8, 12, 14). Telavancin exerts its antimicrobial effects through a multifunctional mechanism that includes inhibition of cell wall synthesis and disruption of the functional integrity of the bacterial membrane (7, 8). In the current study, we have examined the in vitro PAEs, PA-SMEs, and SMEs of telavancin against 16 gram-positive bacteria.

The organisms included 11 strains of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), including 4 vancomycin-intermediate (VISA) isolates, 2 heterogeneous VISA isolates, and 1 vancomycin-resistant (VRSA) strain. All vancomycin-intermediate and -resistant MRSA strains were isolated from patients at Hershey Medical Center. Additionally, one Streptococcus pyogenes, one Streptococcus agalactiae, two vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecalis, and one vancomycin-susceptible Eenterococcus faecium isolate were tested. Telavancin susceptibility powder was obtained from Theravance, Inc., and solubilized as recommended by the manufacturer.

Telavancin MICs were determined by macrodilution procedures (2). The PAE was determined by the viable plate count method (1, 3, 4) using Mueller-Hinton broth (Difco Laboratories, Detroit, MI). The PAEs were induced by exposure to telavancin at 10 times the MIC for 1 h.

For PAE testing, tubes containing 5 ml broth with antibiotic were inoculated with approximately 5 × 106 CFU/ml. Inocula were prepared by suspending colonies from an overnight blood agar plate in broth according to the direct colony suspension method (2). Growth controls with inoculum but no antibiotic were included with each experiment. Inoculated test tubes were placed in a shaking water bath at 35°C for an exposure period of 1 h. At the end of the exposure period, cultures were diluted 1:1,000 in broth to remove the antibiotic by dilution. Removal of the antibiotic was confirmed by comparing the growth curve of a control culture containing no antibiotic to another containing telavancin at 0.001 the exposure concentration (10 times the MIC).

Viability counts were determined before exposure and immediately after dilution (0 h) and then every 2 h until the turbidity of the tube reached a no. 1 McFarland standard. The PAE was defined by the equation PAE = T − C; where T is the time required for viability counts of an antibiotic-exposed culture to increase by 1 log10 above counts immediately after dilution and C is the corresponding time for growth control.

In cultures designated for PA-SME, the PAE was induced as described above, after exposure to 10 times the MIC (see above). After 1:1,000 dilution, cultures were divided into four tubes. To three tubes, telavancin was added to produce final subinhibitory concentrations of 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 times the MIC. The fourth tube did not receive antibiotic. Viability counts were determined before exposure, immediately after dilution, and then every 2 h until their culture turbidities reached a no. 1 McFarland standard. Cultures designated for SME were treated the same as for PA-SME testing except that the PAE was not induced. The formulas used to calculate the PAE, PA-SME, and SME have been previously described (13).

The PA-SMEs and SMEs were measured in two separate experiments (done twice, each starting with a new inoculum). For each experiment, viability counts (log10 number of CFU/ml) were plotted against time, and results were expressed as two separate values (Table 1).

Telavancin MICs ranged from 0.06 to 0.5 μg/ml for all 16 isolates. For the MRSA isolates, telavancin MICs ranged from 0.12 to 0.5 μg/ml. MICs for the VISA and vancomycin-resistant S. aureus strains were slightly higher than those for the vancomycin-sensitive S. aureus and heterogeneous VISA strains, but all telavancin MICs were ≤0.5 μg/ml. Telavancin MICs for S. pyogenes, S. agalactiae, E. faecalis, and E. faecium ranged between 0.06 and 0.25 μg/ml (Table 1).

The duration of the PAEs for all strains varied from 0.3 h to 6.7 h. PA-SMEs generally lasted longer than PAEs for all strains tested and increased with the subinhibitory concentration of telavancin.

S. aureus PAEs were between 0.9 and 3.9 h, with a mean of 1.8 h. The PAEs and PA-SMEs did not differ by vancomycin susceptibility. At 0.4 times the MIC, the vancomycin-susceptible, -heteroresistant, -intermediate, and -resistant strains had mean PA-SMEs of >10.4 h, >8.6 h, >10.3 h, and 8.4 h, respectively (Table 1). The PA-SMEs tested at subinhibitory concentrations of 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 times the MIC lasted longer than did PAEs plus SMEs for all S.aureus strains (Table 1).

For S. pyogenes and S. agalactiae, the mean PAEs were 6.4 and 0.7 h, respectively. For S. pyogenes, the PA-SMEs lasted longer than the PAE plus the SME at 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 times the MIC and were all ≥8.7 h. PA-SMEs exceeded the PAE plus SME at 0.3 and 0.4 times the MIC for S. agalactiae, with mean values of 2.4 and ≥10.8 h, respectively.

For the two E. faecalis strains, the mean PAE was 1.1 h. The mean PA-SMEs at 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 times the MIC were 5.0 h, >9.1 h, and >10.7 h, respectively. The E. faecium strain had a mean PAE of 1.4 h. At subinhibitory concentrations of 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 times the MIC, the mean PA-SMEs were 2.0 h, 9.1 h, and 10.3 h, respectively.

Telavancin MICs were similar to those described previously (6, 7). Pace et al. (12) reported telavancin PAEs of 4 to 6 h when tested against three S. aureus strains. In that study, the PAE for S. aureus (ATCC 33591) was reported to be 6 h, after preexposure of the cultures to telavancin at the MIC (0.5 μg/ml) for 1 h at 37°C. However, in the current study, we found a slightly lower MIC (0.25 μg/ml) and shorter PAEs (1.5, 2.0 h), with a long PA-SME of ≥7.7 h for the same strain. The reasons for these discrepancies are not clear and require further investigation. The very long PA-SMEs found for S. aureus ATCC 33591 in our study suggest that the residual telavancin left after preexposure would have lengthened the PAE in the former study and may explain the findings of Pace et al. (12). The telavancin PAE, PA-SME, and SME values found in this study against S. aureus are similar to those reported by others for vancomycin (5, 9).

In the current study, all of the strains were preexposed to telavancin at 10 times the MIC, well below the clinical levels achievable in humans (14). Telavancin has a long half-life (>7.0 h), with ≥90% protein binding in human serum (14). When an antibiotic has a long half-life, PAE, and PA-SME, longer intervals between doses may be possible, because regrowth continues to be prevented when serum and tissue drug levels fall below the MIC (1). The PAE and PA-SME would be important only for organisms with elevated MICs, where plasma levels (at least of free drug) may fall below the MIC. At the currently reported dosing regimen (10 mg/kg every 24 h) (15-17), the concentrations of telavancin in plasma would exceed the MICs for the strains in this study over the entire dosing interval. The long serum half-life and PA-SMEs found in this study support once-daily dosing of telavancin.

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

PAEs of telavancin for 16 strains

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by a grant from Theravance, Inc., South San Francisco, CA.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 18 September 2008.
    • Returned for modification 23 December 2008.
    • Accepted 26 December 2008.
  • Copyright © 2009 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Cars, O., and I. Odenholt-Tornqvist. 1993. The postantibiotic subMIC effect in vitro and in vivo. J. Antimicrob. Chemother.31(Suppl. D):159-166.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2008. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Approved standard M100-S18. Eighteenth informational supplement. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
  3. 3.↵
    Craig, W. 1993. Pharmacodynamics of antimicrobial agents as a basis for determining dosage regimens. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.12(Suppl. 1):6-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    Craig, W. A., and S. Gudmundsson. 1996. Postantibiotic effect, p. 296-329. In V. Lorian (ed.), Antibiotics in laboratory medicine. The Williams and Wilkins Co., Baltimore, MD.
  5. 5.↵
    Draghi, D. C., B. M. Benton, K. M. Krause, C. Thornsberry, C. Pillar, and D. F. Sahm. 2008. Comparative surveillance study of telavancin activity against recently collected gram-positive clinical isolates from across the United States. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.52:2383-2388.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    Draghi, D. C., B. M. Benton, K. M. Krause, C. Thornsberry, C. Pillar, and D. F. Sahm. 2008. In vitro activity of telavancin against recent Gram-positive clinical isolates: results of the 2004-05 Prospective European Surveillance Initiative. J. Antimicrob. Chemother.62:116-121.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    Higgins, D. L., R. Chang, D. V. Debabov, J. Leung, T. Wu, K. M. Krause, E. Sandvik, J. M. Hubbard, K. Kaniga, D. E. Schmidt, Jr., Q. Gao, R. T. Cass, D. E. Karr, B. M. Benton, and P. P. Humphrey. 2005. Telavancin, a multifunctional lipoglycopeptide, disrupts both cell wall synthesis and cell membrane integrity in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.49:1127-1134.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    Leonard, S. N., and M. J. Rybak. 2008. Telavancin, an antimicrobial with a multifunctional mechanism of action for the treatment of serious Gram-positive infections. Pharmacotherapy28:458-468.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Lowdin, E., I. Odenholt, and O. Cars. 1998. In vitro studies of pharmacodynamic properties of vancomycin against Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. J. Antimicrob. Chemother.42:2739-2744.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    Odenholt-Tornqvist, I. 1993. Studies on the postantibiotic effect and the postantibiotic sub-MIC effect of meropenem. J. Antimicrob. Chemother.31:881-892.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. 11.↵
    Odenholt-Tornqvist, I., E. Löwdin, and O. Cars. 1992. Postantibiotic sub-MIC effects of vancomycin, roxithromycin, sparfloxacin, and amikacin. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.36:1852-1858.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    Pace, J. L., K. Krause, D. Johnston, D. Debabov, T. Wu, L. Farrington, C Lane, D. L. Higgins, B. Christensen, J. K. Judice, and K. Kaniga. 2003. In vitro activity of TD-6424 against Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.47:3602-3604.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    Pankuch, G. A., and P. C. Appelbaum. 2006. Postantibiotic effect of ceftobiprole against 12 gram-positive organisms. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.50:3956-3958.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    Shaw, J. P., J. Seroogy, K. Kaniga, D. L. Higgins, M. Kitt, and S. Barriere. 2005. Pharmacokinetics, serum inhibitory and bactericidal activity, and safety of telavancin in healthy subjects. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.49:195-201.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    Stryjewski, M. E., D. R. Graham, S. E. Wilson, W. O'Riordan, D. Young, A. Lentnek, D. P. Ross, V. G. Fowler, A. Hopkins, H. D. Friedland, S. L. Barriere, M. M. Kitt, and G. R. Corey on behalf of the Assessment of Telavancin in Complicated Skin and Skin-Structure Infections Study. 2008. Telavancin versus vancomycin for the treatment of complicated skin and skin-structure infections caused by gram-positive organisms. Clin. Infect. Dis.46:1683-1693.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  16. 16.
    Stryjewski, M. E., V. H. Chu, W. D. O'Riordan, B. L. Warren, L. M. Dunbar, D. M. Young, M. Vallée, V. G. Fowler, Jr., J. Morganroth, S. L. Barriere, M. M. Kitt, G. R. Corey, and the FAST Investigator Group. 2006. Telavancin versus standard therapy for treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by Gram-positive bacteria: FAST 2 study. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.50:862-867.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    Stryjewski, M. E., W. D. O'Riordan, W. K. Lau, F. D. Pien, L. M. Dunbar, M. Vallee, V. G. Fowler, Jr., V. C. Chu, E. Spencer, S. L. Barriere, M. M. Kitt, C. H. Cabell, G. R. Corey, and the FAST Investigator Group. 2005. Telavancin versus standard therapy for treatment of complicated skin and soft-tissue infections due to Gram-positive bacteria. Clin. Infect. Dis.40:1601-1607.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Postantibiotic Effects of Telavancin against 16 Gram-Positive Organisms
G. A. Pankuch, P. C. Appelbaum
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Feb 2009, 53 (3) 1275-1277; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01244-08

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.
Postantibiotic Effects of Telavancin against 16 Gram-Positive Organisms
(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
Postantibiotic Effects of Telavancin against 16 Gram-Positive Organisms
G. A. Pankuch, P. C. Appelbaum
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Feb 2009, 53 (3) 1275-1277; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01244-08
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

aminoglycosides
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Gram-positive bacteria

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