BACTERICIDAL ACTIVITIES OF CEFPROZIL, PENICILLIN, CEFACLOR, CEFIXIME,AND LORACARBEF AGAINST PENICILLIN-SUSCEPTIBLE AND PENICILLIN-RESISTANT STREPTOCOCCUS-PNEUMONIAE IN AN IN-VITRO PHARMACODYNAMIC INFECTION MODEL
Dm. Cappelletty et Mj. Rybak, BACTERICIDAL ACTIVITIES OF CEFPROZIL, PENICILLIN, CEFACLOR, CEFIXIME,AND LORACARBEF AGAINST PENICILLIN-SUSCEPTIBLE AND PENICILLIN-RESISTANT STREPTOCOCCUS-PNEUMONIAE IN AN IN-VITRO PHARMACODYNAMIC INFECTION MODEL, Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 40(5), 1996, pp. 1148-1152
We examined the bactericidal activities of penicillin, cefprozil, cefi
xime, cefaclor, and loracarbef against three clinical isolates of Stre
ptococcus pneumoniae which were susceptible, moderately susceptible, a
nd resistant to penicillin. An in vitro two-compartment glass infectio
n model was used to simulate human pharmacokinetics in the presence of
bacteria. Also, changes in organism susceptibility and development of
resistant subpopulations were evaluated. Simulated pediatric dosage r
egimens and target peak concentrations in the central compartment were
as follows: penicillin V-potassium, 26 mg/kg of body weight every 6 h
(q6h) and 14 mu g/ml; cefaclor, 13.4 mg/kg q8h and 16 mu g/ml; loraca
rbef, 15 mg/kg q12h and 19 mu g/ml; cefprozil, 15 mg/kg q12h and 11 mu
g/ml; and cefixime, 8mg/kg q24h and 4 mu g/ml. Targeted half-lives of
each agent were 1 h for penicillin, cefaclor, and loracarbef; 1.3 h f
or cefprozil; and 3.5 h for cefixime. Growth controls were performed a
t two different pump rates, 0.8 and 2.0 ml/min (half-lives = 3.5 and 1
h, respectively). Each isolate demonstrated autolysis at the lower ra
te which was attributed to a decreased supply of fresh nutrients avail
able to the organisms in the infection compartment. Against the suscep
tible isolate, the time to 99.9% killing was statistically significant
between penicillin V-potassium and both cefaclor and cefixime (P < 0.
029). Loracarbef never achieved a 99.9% reduction in the inoculum. At
48 h penicillin, cefprozil, and cefaclor were equivalent in extent of
killing. Against the intermediately resistant isolate, cefprozil was s
uperior to all other regimens with respect to rate of killing (P < 0.0
13) and extent of killing at 24 h (P < 0.0003). At 48 h penicillin, ce
fprozil, and cefaclor were equivalent in extent of killing. All of the
regimens exhibited inferior activity against this penicillin-resistan
t isolate. A 99.9% kill was never obtained with any of the regimens, n
or was there an appreciable decrease in the colony counts. In conclusi
on, it appears that cefprozil, penicillin, and cefaclor are effective
therapies against sensitive and even intermediately sensitive isolates
of S. pneumoniae. However, none of the oral therapies appear to be of
any benefit against penicillin-resistant isolates. The in vitro model
may be an effective tool in evaluating other multiple-dose therapies
against this fastidious organism, since the continual supply of fresh
medium maintains the viability of S. pneumoniae with minimal stationar
y-phase autolysis.