Title

Pharmacodynamic Activity of Ceftobiprole Compared with Vancomycin versus Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Vancomycin-Intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) and Vancomycin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA) Using an In Vitro Model

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2009

Abstract

Background This study compared the pharmacodynamics of ceftobiprole and vancomycin against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (VISA) and vancomycin-resistant S. aureus (VRSA) using an in vitro model.

Methods Two methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA), two community-associated (CA)-MRSA, one healthcare-associated (HA)-MRSA, three VISA and two VRSA were studied. The pharmacodynamic model was inoculated with a concentration of 1 × 106 cfu/mL and ceftobiprole dosed every 8 h (at 0, 8 and 16 h) to simulate the fCmax and t1/2 obtained after 500 mg intravenous (iv) every 8 h dosing (fCmax, 30 mg/L; t1/2, 3.5 h). Vancomycin was dosed every 12 h (at 0 and 12 h) to simulate fCmax and t1/2 obtained after 1 g iv every 12 h dosing (fCmax, 20 mg/L; t1/2, 8 h). Samples were collected over 24 h to assess viable growth.

Results Ceftobiprole T > MIC of ≥100% (ceftobiprole MICs, ≤2 mg/L) was bactericidal (≥3 log10 killing) against MSSA, CA-MRSA, HA-MRSA, VISA and VRSA at 16 and 24 h. Vancomycin fAUC24/MIC of 340 (vancomycin MIC, 1 mg/L for MSSA and MRSA) resulted in a 1.8–2.6 log10 reduction in colony count at 24 h. Vancomycin fAUC24/MIC of 85–170 (vancomycin MIC, 2–4 mg/L for VISA) resulted in a 0.4–0.7 log10 reduction at 24 h. Vancomycin fAUC24/MIC of 5.3 (vancomycin MIC, 64 mg/L for VRSA) resulted in a limited effect.

Conclusions Ceftobiprole T > MIC of ≥100% (ceftobiprole MICs, ≤2 mg/L) was bactericidal (≥3 log10 killing) against MSSA, CA-MRSA, HA-MRSA, VISA and VRSA at 16 and 24 h. Vancomycin was bacteriostatic against MSSA, MRSA and VISA, while demonstrating no activity against VRSA.

Comments

This article was originally published in Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, volume 64, issue 2, in 2009. DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkp176

Copyright

The authors