Pharmaceutical research · 2022
Differences in Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Parameters of Tedizolid Against VRE and MRSA.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Liu Xiaoxi, Tashiro Sho, Igarashi Yuki, Takemura Wataru, Kojima Nana, Morita Takumi, Hayashi Marina, Enoki Yuki, Taguchi Kazuaki, Matsumoto Kazuaki
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) have recently become a major cause of nosocomial infections and a global public health concern. Tedizolid exhibits powerful antibacterial activity against VRE in vitro, but its pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) parameters remain unclear. Therefore, we aimed to determine the PK/PD indices of tedizolid action on VRE and the mechanisms underlying the PK/PD indices differences of tedizolid against VRE and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
METHODS: Optimal PK/PD target values of tedizolid were determined in vitro, based on time-kill curves and post-antibiotic effects (PAEs), and in vivo, using mouse models of thigh infection with VRE and MRSA strains.
RESULTS: The tedizolid bactericidal activity on VRE and MRSA was time-dependent. Correlations were closest between fAUC24/MIC and the tedizolid PK/PD index against MRSA and VRE. To achieve 1 log10 kill tedizolid fAUC24/MIC in neutropenic mouse models of thigh infection with VRE and MRSA should be 14.2 and 138.5, respectively. The PAEs of tedizolid against VRE and MRSA were 2.39 and 0.99 h, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Tedizolid showed bactericidal effects against VRE even in neutropenic mice unlike MRSA, which could be attributed to its longer PAE against VRE. Hence, we hypothesize that tedizolid treatment against VRE infections is promising for achieving therapeutic success in clinical.
METHODS: Optimal PK/PD target values of tedizolid were determined in vitro, based on time-kill curves and post-antibiotic effects (PAEs), and in vivo, using mouse models of thigh infection with VRE and MRSA strains.
RESULTS: The tedizolid bactericidal activity on VRE and MRSA was time-dependent. Correlations were closest between fAUC24/MIC and the tedizolid PK/PD index against MRSA and VRE. To achieve 1 log10 kill tedizolid fAUC24/MIC in neutropenic mouse models of thigh infection with VRE and MRSA should be 14.2 and 138.5, respectively. The PAEs of tedizolid against VRE and MRSA were 2.39 and 0.99 h, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Tedizolid showed bactericidal effects against VRE even in neutropenic mice unlike MRSA, which could be attributed to its longer PAE against VRE. Hence, we hypothesize that tedizolid treatment against VRE infections is promising for achieving therapeutic success in clinical.