4.7 Article

Intrapulmonary distribution of intravenous telavancin in healthy subjects and effect of pulmonary surfactant on in vitro activities of telavancin and other antibiotics

Journal

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 52, Issue 1, Pages 92-97

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00875-07

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Steady-state concentrations of telavancin, a novel, bactericidal lipoglycopeptide, were determined in the plasma, pulmonary epithelial lining fluid (ELF), and alveolar macrophages (AMs) of 20 healthy subjects. Telavancin at 10 mg of drug/kg of body weight/day was administered as a 1-h intravenous infusion on three successive days, with bronchoalveolar lavage performed on five subjects, each at 4, 8, 12, and 24 h after the last dose. Plasma samples were collected before the first and third infusions and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 24 h after the third infusion. The plasma telavancin concentration-time profile was as reported previously. Telavancin (mean standard deviation) penetrated well into ELF(3.73 +/- 1.28 mu g/ml at 8 h and 0.89 +/- 1.03 mu g/ml at 24 h) and extensively into AMs (19.0 +/- 16.8 mu g/ml at 8 h, 45.0 +/- 22.4 mu g/ml at 12 h, and 42.0 +/- 31.4 mu g/ml at 24 h). Mean concentrations in AMs and plasma at 12 h were 45.0 mu g/ml and 22.9 mu g/ml (mean AM/plasma ratio, 1.93), respectively, and at 24 h were 42.0 mu g/ml and 7.28 mu g/ml (mean AM/plasma ratio, 6.67), respectively. Over the entire dosing interval, telavancin was present in ELF and AMs at concentrations up to 8-fold and 85-fold, respectively, above its MIC90 for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (0.5 mu g/ml). Pulmonary surfactant did not affect telavancin's in vitro antibacterial activity. Telavancin was well tolerated. These results support the proposal for further clinical evaluation of telavancin for treating gram-positive respiratory infections.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available