The Annals Summaries of the Latest Medical Research!
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 416-422. DOI 10.1345/aph.1A119
© 2002 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow PDF
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kays, M.
Right arrow Articles by Graff, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kays, M.
Right arrow Articles by Graff, M.


Research Articles

Broth microdilution and E-test for determining fluoroquinolone activity against Streptococcus pneumoniae

MB Kays and MA Graff

OBJECTIVE: To compare broth microdilution and E-test minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of 4 fluoroquinolones against Streptococcus pneumoniae and to determine the effect of these in vitro MIC methods on the calculation of AUC00-24/MIC ratios. METHODS: Levofloxacin, gatifloxacin, moxifloxacin, and gemifloxacin MICs were determined by broth microdilution (incubated in air) and E-test (incubated in CO2) for 100 clinical isolates of S. pneumoniae. MIC50, MIC90, and geometric mean MIC were calculated. Steady-state serum concentration-time profiles were simulated for once-daily, oral dosing of levofloxacin 500 mg, gatifloxacin 400 mg, moxifloxacin 400 mg, and gemifloxacin 320 mg. After correcting for protein binding, AUC0-24 of unbound drug was calculated for each regimen, and AUC0-24/MIC ratios were calculated using MIC data from both in vitro methods. Differences in MICs between methods were determined for each agent using the paired t-test (after logarithmic transformation of MICs) and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Differences in AUC0-24/MIC ratios were also determined using the paired t-test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The level of significance for all analyses was p < 0.05. RESULTS: Broth microdilution and E-test MICs were within +/- 1 log2 dilution for 94%, 93%, 61%, and 35% of the isolates for levofloxacin, gatifloxacin, moxifloxacin, and gemifloxacin, respectively. Broth microdilution MICs were significantly lower than E-test MICs for all 4 agents (p < 0.001). However, a categorical change in susceptibility was seen for only 1 isolate with gatifloxacin and moxifloxacin (intermediate by broth microdilution, resistant by E-test). AUC0-24/MIC ratios were significantly higher for each regimen when MICs were determined by broth microdilution compared with E-test (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant difference in the activity of the newer fluoroquinolones against S. pneumoniae when MICs are determined by broth microdilution and E-test. When evaluating fluoroquinolone activity and pharmacodynamics against this organism, clinicians must be aware that MIC testing methodology may have a significant impact on the results.





homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 2002 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.