4.7 Article

In vitro activity of S-3578, a new broad-spectrum cephalosporin active against methicillin-resistant staphylococci

期刊

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY
卷 47, 期 3, 页码 923-931

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.3.923-931.2003

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The in vitro antibacterial activity of S-3578, a new parenteral cephalosporin, against clinical isolates was evaluated. The MICs of the drug at which 90% of the isolates were inhibited were 4 mug/ml for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and 2 mug/ml for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis, which were fourfold higher than and equal to those of vancomycin, respectively. The anti-MRSA activity of S-3578 was considered to be due to its high affinity for penicillin-binding protein 2a (50% inhibitory concentration, 4.5 mug/ml). In time-kill studies with 10 strains each of MRSA and methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, S-3578 caused more than a 4-log(10) decrease of viable cells on the average at twice the MIC after 24 h of exposure, indicating that it had potent bactericidal activity. Furthermore, in population analysis of MRSA strains with heterogeneous or homogeneous resistance to imipenem, no colonies emerged from about 10(9) cells on agar plates containing twice the MIC of S-3578, suggesting the low frequency of emergence of S-3578-resistant strains from MRSA. S-3578 was also highly active against penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae (PRSP), with a MIC90 of 1 mug/ml, which was comparable to that of ceftriaxone. S-3578 also had antibacterial activity against a variety of gram-negative bacteria including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, though its activity was not superior to that of cefepime. In conclusion, S-3578 exhibited a broad antibacterial spectrum and, particularly, had excellent activity against gram-positive bacteria including methicillin-resistant staphylococci and PRSP. Thus, S-3578 was considered to be worthy of further evaluation.

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