4.7 Article

In Vivo Efficacy of Relebactam (MK-7655) in Combination with Imipenem-Cilastatin in Murine Infection Models

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.02577-17

关键词

beta-lactamase inhibitors; Klebsiella pneumoniae; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; imipenem resistant; multidrug resistance; relebactam

资金

  1. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The World Health Organization has identified antimicrobial resistance as 0. a global public health threat since the prevalence and spread of antibiotic resistance among bacterial pathogens worldwide are staggering. Carbapenems, such as imipenem and meropenem, have been used to treat multidrug-resistant bacteria; however, since the development of resistance to carbapenems, beta-lactam antibiotics in combination with beta-lactamase inhibitors (BLI) has been one of the most successful strategies to enhance the activity of beta-lactam antibiotics. Relebactam (REL) is a new BLI which has been found to inhibit class A and class C beta-lactamases in vitro. REL has been reported to restore imipenem's activity against both imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Reported here are the in vivo efficacy studies of the imipenem-cilastatin (IMI-REL combination in mouse models of disseminated and pulmonary infection caused by imipenem-resistant clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa and K. pneumoniae. The combination was also evaluated in a P. aeruginosa delayed pulmonary model of infection. IMI-REL was found to be effective in the disseminated model of infection with log reduction in P. aeruginosa CFU of 3.73, 3.13, and 1.72 at REL doses of 40, 20, and 10 mg/kg, respectively. For K. pneumoniae, log reductions in CFU of 2.36, 3.06, and 2.29 were reported at REL doses of 80, 40, and 20 mg/kg, respectively. The combination was less effective in the delayed pulmonary model than in the immediate pulmonary model; however, overall REL was found to be effective against these imipenem-resistant strains.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据