We have located links that may give you full text access.
Efficacy of tedizolid against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Peptostreptococcus anaerobius in thigh mixed-infection mouse model.
Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy : Official Journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy 2017 June
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare the antimicrobial activity of human simulated exposures of tedizolid 200 mg daily, and linezolid 600 mg every 12 h for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) caused by MRSA and Peptostreptococcus anaerobius in both the neutropenic mice thigh mixed-infection models.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: Tedizolid phosphate and linezolid were used for all in vivo testing. A total of one MRSA and two P. anaerobius isolates were utilized. Antimicrobial efficacy was calculated for each isolate as the change in bacterial numbers (Δlog10 CFU/ml) obtained in the treated mice after 24 h compared with the numbers in the starting control animals (0 h).
RESULTS: The tedizolid and linezolid MICs for MRSA was 0.25 and 2 μg/ml. Tedizolid MIC for P. anaerobius was 0.12 μg/ml, and linezolid MICs for two P. anaerobius isolates were 0.5 and 1 μg/ml. In mixed infection model, tedizolid therapy showed similar antimicrobial activities for one MRSA and two P. anaerobius isolates evaluated, compared with linezolid therapy. Additionally, when comparing the activity of tedizolid and linezolid monotherapy between single infection and mixed infection model, antimicrobial activities of both antimicrobials were attenuated when mixed infection model was used.
CONCLUSION: In the neutropenic murine thigh infection model, human simulated exposures of tedizolid and linezolid resulted in similar efficacies against MRSA, even though single and mixed infection models were used. These data support the clinical utility of tedizolid for use against MRSA and P. anaerobius in the treatment of cSSSI.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: Tedizolid phosphate and linezolid were used for all in vivo testing. A total of one MRSA and two P. anaerobius isolates were utilized. Antimicrobial efficacy was calculated for each isolate as the change in bacterial numbers (Δlog10 CFU/ml) obtained in the treated mice after 24 h compared with the numbers in the starting control animals (0 h).
RESULTS: The tedizolid and linezolid MICs for MRSA was 0.25 and 2 μg/ml. Tedizolid MIC for P. anaerobius was 0.12 μg/ml, and linezolid MICs for two P. anaerobius isolates were 0.5 and 1 μg/ml. In mixed infection model, tedizolid therapy showed similar antimicrobial activities for one MRSA and two P. anaerobius isolates evaluated, compared with linezolid therapy. Additionally, when comparing the activity of tedizolid and linezolid monotherapy between single infection and mixed infection model, antimicrobial activities of both antimicrobials were attenuated when mixed infection model was used.
CONCLUSION: In the neutropenic murine thigh infection model, human simulated exposures of tedizolid and linezolid resulted in similar efficacies against MRSA, even though single and mixed infection models were used. These data support the clinical utility of tedizolid for use against MRSA and P. anaerobius in the treatment of cSSSI.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app