Drug Investigation

, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 127–134 | Cite as

Comparative In Vitro Evaluation of Cefepime, an Aminothiazolyl Methoxyamino Cephem

  • S. M. Hussain Qadri
  • Yoshio Ueno
  • Edna Almodovar
  • Daniel Tullo
  • Mohammed N. Al-Ahdal
Original Research Article

Summary

The in vitro activity of cefepime, a new aminothiazolyl methoxyamino cephem, was compared with other commonly used antimicrobial agents against 425 strains of Enterobacteriaceae, 138 isolates of other Gram-negative bacilli and 334 strains of Gram-positive cocci. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of cefepime were between < 0.03 and 0.5 mg/L for 90% of the Enterobacteriaceae isolates tested, and all 60 isolates of Enterobacter cloacae and Serratia marcescens were inhibited by < 0.03 to 4.0 mg/L of this cephem. Cefepime was the most effective of the drugs tested against Aeromonas hydrophila; its activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Xanthomonas maltophilia and Acinetobacter was comparable to that of ceftazidime and ceftriaxone. All the isolates of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus were inhibited by a concentration of cefepime 0.5 to 8.0 mg/L. Cefepime inhibited all 176 isolates of Streptococcus pyogenes, S. agalactiae and S. pneumoniae at concentrations of < 0.015 to 1.0 mg/L. Like other members of its class, it had little or no activity against Xanthomonas, methicillin-resistant S. aureus and enterococci.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Al-Mugeiren MM, Al-Rasheed SA, Abdulrahman MB, Al-Qufi MA, Patel PJ, et al. Are children with urinary tract infection adequately managed? Saudi Medical Journal 13: 300–304, 1992Google Scholar
  2. Barbhaiya RH, Forgue ST, Gleason CR, Knupp CA, Pittman KA, et al. Safety, tolerance, & pharmacokinetic evaluation of cefepime after administration of single intravenous dose. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 34: 1118–1122, 1990aPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbhaiya RH, Knupp CA, Forgue ST, Matzke GR, Guay DR, et al. Pharmacokinetics of cefepime in subjects with renal insufficiency. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 48: 268–276, 1990bPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balows A, Hausler Jr WJ, Hermann KL, Isenberg HD, Shadomy HJ. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington DC, 1991Google Scholar
  5. Bodey GP, Ho DH, LeBlanc B. In-vitro studies of BMY 28142, a new broad-spectrum cephalosporin. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 27: 265–269, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cefepime. Investigator Brochure, Bristol-Myers Company, Pharmaceutical Research & Development Division 1987Google Scholar
  7. Clarke AM, Zemcow SJ, Wright JM. HR 810 and BMY 28142, two new cephalosporins with broad spectrum activity: An in-vitro comparison with other beta-lactam antibiotics. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 15: 305–310, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clynes N, Scully BE, Neu HC. Antimicrobial clinical studies: the use of cefepime (BMY 28142) to treat respiratory infections. Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 12: 257–260, 1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dornbusch K, Mortsell E, Goransson E. In-vitro activity of cefepime, a new parenteral cephalosporin, against recent European blood isolates and in comparison with piperacillin/tazobactam. Chemotherapy 36: 259–267, 1990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edelstein H, Chirurgi V, Oster S, Karp R, Cassano K, et al. A randomized trial of cefepime (BMY 28142) and ceftazidime for the treatment of pneumonia. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 28: 569–575, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Farrar WA. Antibiotic resistance in developing countries. Journal of Infectious Diseases 152: 1103–1106, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fuchs PC, Jones RN, Barry AL, Thornsberry C. Evaluation of the in-vitro activity of BMY-28142, a new broad-spectrum cephalosporin. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 27: 679–682, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim KS, Bayer S. Efficacy of BMY-28142 in experimental bacteremia and meningitis caused by Escherichia coli and group B streptococci. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 28: 51–54, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kessler RE, Bies M, Buck RE, Chisholm DR, Puriano TA, et al. Comparison of a new cephalosporin BMY-28142 with other broad-spectrum beta-lactam antibiotics. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 27: 207–216, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kovarik J, Rozenberg-Arska M, Visser M, Verhoef J. Pharmacodynamics of cefepime. Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases 74 (Suppl.): 270–273, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Murray BE, Alvarado T, Kim KH, et al. Increasing resistance to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole among isolates of Escherichia coli in developing countries. Journal of Infectious Diseases 152: 1107–1113, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS). Methods for dilution antimicrobials susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. Approved standard M7-A2. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Villanova, PA, 1990Google Scholar
  18. Neu HC, Chin NX, Jules K, Labthavikul P. The activity of BMY-28142, a new broad-spectrum beta-lactamase stable cephalosporin. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 17: 441–452, 1986PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Okamoto MP, Chin A, Gill MA, Yellin AE, Berne TV, et al. Analysis of cefepime: tissue penetration into human appendix. Pharmacotherapy 11: 353–358, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Oster S, Edelstein H, Cassano K, McCabe R. Open trial of cefepime (BMY-28142) for infections in hospitalized patients. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 34: 954–957, 1990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Qadri SMH, Kroschinsky RM, Cunha BA. Similarities and differences in the antimicrobial resistance of clinical isolates in Saudi Arabia and the United States. Current Therapeutic Research 47: 130–135, 1990Google Scholar
  22. Qadri SMH, Ostrawski SM, Johnson S, Fluornoy W. Differences in antimicrobial susceptibilities of clinical isolates in Saudi Arabia and the United States. Journal of the National Medical Association 79: 433–437, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Tsuji A, Maniatis A, Bertram MA, Young LS. In-vitro activity of BMY-28142 in comparison with those of other beta-lactam antimicrobial agents. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 27: 515–519, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. M. Hussain Qadri
    • 1
  • Yoshio Ueno
    • 1
  • Edna Almodovar
    • 1
  • Daniel Tullo
    • 1
  • Mohammed N. Al-Ahdal
    • 1
  1. 1.King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research CentreRiyadhSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations