Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

CEM-101 Activity against Gram-Positive Organisms

CEM-101 Activity against Gram-Positive Organisms CEM-101 Activity against Gram-Positive Organisms ▿ Leah N. Woosley 1 , Mariana Castanheira 1 , * and Ronald N. Jones 1 , 2 1 JMI Laboratories, North Liberty, Iowa 2 Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts ABSTRACT The in vitro activity of CEM-101, a new fluoroketolide, was determined against Gram-positive organisms with various macrolide susceptibility profiles. Experiments for determination of the MICs and minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBCs), timed killing, single-step and multistep mutation rates, the erythromycin induction of resistance, postantibiotic effect (PAE), and drug interactions were performed for CEM-101; and the results were compared to those obtained with telithromycin, macrolides, and lincosamides. The MBCs of CEM-101 remained lower overall than those of telithromycin, and CEM-101 displayed a 2-fold greater potency than the ketolide. Timed-killing curve testing showed that CEM-101 had greater bactericidal activity than telithromycin (a ≥3-log 10 -CFU/ml decrease in the initial inoculum at 24 h) against the staphylococcal isolates tested. The propensity of CEM-101 to cause resistance was low, as determined from the rates of resistance determined in single-step mutational studies (<10 −8 or 10 −9 ). In multipassaging studies, mutants of two strains (both of which were USA300 isolates) resistant to CEM-101 emerged. That number was comparable to the number resistant to clindamycin but less than the number resistant to telithromycin. Erythromycin induced CEM-101 resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae , similar to telithromycin; however, in seven of eight beta-hemolytic streptococci, CEM-101 resistance induction was not observed. CEM-101 showed a significant concentration- and exposure-dependent PAE against the strains tested, with the values ranging from 2.3 to 6.1 h for Gram-positive organisms (these times were longer than those for telithromycin). No antagonism was found in synergy analyses, with enhanced inhibition being most noted for combinations with CEM-101 and ceftriaxone, gentamicin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Overall, this new antimicrobial agent (CEM-101) showed good antimicrobial characteristics compared with those of the agents in its class and exhibited measured parameter values similar or superior to those of utilized comparators, indicating that CEM-101 warrants further clinical evaluation. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy American Society For Microbiology

CEM-101 Activity against Gram-Positive Organisms

CEM-101 Activity against Gram-Positive Organisms

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy , Volume 54 (5): 2182 – May 1, 2010

Abstract

CEM-101 Activity against Gram-Positive Organisms ▿ Leah N. Woosley 1 , Mariana Castanheira 1 , * and Ronald N. Jones 1 , 2 1 JMI Laboratories, North Liberty, Iowa 2 Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts ABSTRACT The in vitro activity of CEM-101, a new fluoroketolide, was determined against Gram-positive organisms with various macrolide susceptibility profiles. Experiments for determination of the MICs and minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBCs), timed killing, single-step and multistep mutation rates, the erythromycin induction of resistance, postantibiotic effect (PAE), and drug interactions were performed for CEM-101; and the results were compared to those obtained with telithromycin, macrolides, and lincosamides. The MBCs of CEM-101 remained lower overall than those of telithromycin, and CEM-101 displayed a 2-fold greater potency than the ketolide. Timed-killing curve testing showed that CEM-101 had greater bactericidal activity than telithromycin (a ≥3-log 10 -CFU/ml decrease in the initial inoculum at 24 h) against the staphylococcal isolates tested. The propensity of CEM-101 to cause resistance was low, as determined from the rates of resistance determined in single-step mutational studies (<10 −8 or 10 −9 ). In multipassaging studies, mutants of two strains (both of which were USA300 isolates) resistant to CEM-101 emerged. That number was comparable to the number resistant to clindamycin but less than the number resistant to telithromycin. Erythromycin induced CEM-101 resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae , similar to telithromycin; however, in seven of eight beta-hemolytic streptococci, CEM-101 resistance induction was not observed. CEM-101 showed a significant concentration- and exposure-dependent PAE against the strains tested, with the values ranging from 2.3 to 6.1 h for Gram-positive organisms (these times were longer than those for telithromycin). No antagonism was found in synergy analyses, with enhanced inhibition being most noted for combinations with CEM-101 and ceftriaxone, gentamicin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Overall, this new antimicrobial agent (CEM-101) showed good antimicrobial characteristics compared with those of the agents in its class and exhibited measured parameter values similar or superior to those of utilized comparators, indicating that CEM-101 warrants further clinical evaluation.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-society-for-microbiology/cem-101-activity-against-gram-positive-organisms-XgZou70qlX

References (28)

Publisher
American Society For Microbiology
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 by the American society for Microbiology.
ISSN
0066-4804
eISSN
1098-6596
DOI
10.1128/AAC.01662-09
pmid
20176910
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

CEM-101 Activity against Gram-Positive Organisms ▿ Leah N. Woosley 1 , Mariana Castanheira 1 , * and Ronald N. Jones 1 , 2 1 JMI Laboratories, North Liberty, Iowa 2 Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts ABSTRACT The in vitro activity of CEM-101, a new fluoroketolide, was determined against Gram-positive organisms with various macrolide susceptibility profiles. Experiments for determination of the MICs and minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBCs), timed killing, single-step and multistep mutation rates, the erythromycin induction of resistance, postantibiotic effect (PAE), and drug interactions were performed for CEM-101; and the results were compared to those obtained with telithromycin, macrolides, and lincosamides. The MBCs of CEM-101 remained lower overall than those of telithromycin, and CEM-101 displayed a 2-fold greater potency than the ketolide. Timed-killing curve testing showed that CEM-101 had greater bactericidal activity than telithromycin (a ≥3-log 10 -CFU/ml decrease in the initial inoculum at 24 h) against the staphylococcal isolates tested. The propensity of CEM-101 to cause resistance was low, as determined from the rates of resistance determined in single-step mutational studies (<10 −8 or 10 −9 ). In multipassaging studies, mutants of two strains (both of which were USA300 isolates) resistant to CEM-101 emerged. That number was comparable to the number resistant to clindamycin but less than the number resistant to telithromycin. Erythromycin induced CEM-101 resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae , similar to telithromycin; however, in seven of eight beta-hemolytic streptococci, CEM-101 resistance induction was not observed. CEM-101 showed a significant concentration- and exposure-dependent PAE against the strains tested, with the values ranging from 2.3 to 6.1 h for Gram-positive organisms (these times were longer than those for telithromycin). No antagonism was found in synergy analyses, with enhanced inhibition being most noted for combinations with CEM-101 and ceftriaxone, gentamicin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Overall, this new antimicrobial agent (CEM-101) showed good antimicrobial characteristics compared with those of the agents in its class and exhibited measured parameter values similar or superior to those of utilized comparators, indicating that CEM-101 warrants further clinical evaluation.

Journal

Antimicrobial Agents and ChemotherapyAmerican Society For Microbiology

Published: May 1, 2010

There are no references for this article.