4.3 Article

In vitro activity of eravacycline against 2213 Gram-negative and 2424 Gram-positive bacterial pathogens isolated in Canadian hospital laboratories: CANWARD surveillance study 2014-2015

Journal

DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE
Volume 91, Issue 1, Pages 55-62

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2017.12.013

Keywords

Eravacycline; Gram-negative; Gram-positive; CANWARD; Surveillance; In vitro

Funding

  1. University of Manitoba (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada)
  2. Health Sciences Centre (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada)
  3. National Microbiology Laboratory (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada)
  4. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals (Watertown, MA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Gram-negative (n = 2213) and Gram-positive (n = 2424) pathogens isolated from patients in 13 Canadian hospitals in 2014 and 2015 were tested for in vitro susceptibility to eravacycline and comparators using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute broth microdilution method. The concentration of eravacycline inhibiting 90% of isolates (MIC90) ranged from 0.5 to 2 mu g/mL for 9 species of Enterobacteriaceae tested (n = 2067). Eravacycline activity was largely unaffected by extended-spectrum beta-lactamase phenotypes in Escherichia coli (n = 141) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 21). Eravacycline was active against Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 28; MIC90, 0.5 mu g/mL) and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (n = 118; MIC90, 4 mu g/mL). Eravacycline MIC90 for staphylococci (n = 1653), enterococci (n = 289), and streptococci (n = 482) ranged from 0.12 to 025, 0.06 to 0.12, and 0.015 to 0.06 mu g/mL, respectively. Eravacycline's potency was equivalent to or 2- to 4-fold greater than tigecycline against Enterobacteriaceae and Gram-positive cocci tested. Eravacycline demonstrates promising activity against recent clinical Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, including multidrug-resistant pathogens. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available