Clinical Drug Investigation

, Volume 15, Supplement 1, pp 19–34 | Cite as

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Tolerability Profile of Clinafloxacin

  • Charles W. Stratton
Review Article

Summary

Clinafloxacin is a broad-spectrum and highly potent member of the fluoro-quinolone class of antibiotics, with enhanced activity against difficult-to-treat Gram-negative, Gram-positive, and anaerobic pathogens. It appears that the most important factor in terms of structure-activity is the chloride atom at the C-8 position. Clinafloxacin has a tolerability profile that is similar to that of other quinolones. Structure-tolerability issues related to the C-8 halogen, such as phototoxicity, should not be a major problem for an antimicrobial agent used for nosocomial infections in hospitalised patients. Similar class-related tolerability issues of the quinolone class of antimicrobial agents, such as tendinitis, should not be an important issue in hospitalised patients.

The activity of clinafloxacin against multidrug-resistant nosocomial pathogens and anaerobes suggests that this agent would be well suited for empirical therapy of nosocomial infections in seriously ill patients. Initial in vivo animal studies have confirmed that the enhanced in vitro activity of clinafloxacin against difficult-to-treat nosocomial pathogens results in increased in vivo efficacy. The success in animal models has led to the current series of ongoing clinical trials. Published data from these studies to date have confirmed the efficacy of clinafloxacin against difficult-to-treat nosocomial pathogens.

Keywords

Adis International Limited Fluoroquinolones Ofloxacin Quinolones Antimicrob Agent 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cozzarelli NR. DNA gyrase and the supercoiling of DNA. Science 1980; 207: 953–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vosberg HD. Topoisomerases: enzymes that control DNA conformations. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 1985; 114: 19–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang JC. DNA topoisomerases. Annu Rev Biochem 1985; 54: 655–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Drlica K. Inhibitors of DNA topoisomerases. Biochem 1988; 27: 2253–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shen LL, Pernet AG. Mechanism of inhibition of DNA gyrase by analogues of nalidixic acid: the target of the drugs is DNA. Proc Natl Acad sci USA 1985; 82: 307–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Moreau NJ, Robaux H, Baron L, et al. Inhibitory effects of quinolones on pro and eucaryotic DNA topoisomerases I and II. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 1955–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ng EY, Trucksis M, Hooper DC. Quinolone resistance mutations in topoisomerase IV: relationship to the flaA locus and genetic evidence that topoisomerase IV is the primary target and DNA gyrase is the secondary target of fluoroquinolones in Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1966; 40: 1881–8Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pan XS, Fisher LM. Cloning and characterization of the parC and parE genes of Streptococcus pneumoniae encoding DNA topoisomerase IV: role in fluoroquinolone resistance. J Bacteriol 1996; 178: 4060–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chu DTW, Fernandes PB. Structure-activity relationships of the fluoroquinolones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989; 33: 131–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Percival A. Impact of chemical structure on quinolone potency, spectrum, and side effects. J Antimicrob Chemother 1991; 28Suppl. C: Sl–8Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Domagala JM. Structure-activity and structure-side-effect relationships for the quinolone antibacterials. J Antimicrob Chemother 1994; 33: 685–706PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bryskier A, Chanot JF. Classification and structure-activity relationships of fluoroquinolones. Drugs 1995; 49Suppl. 2: 16–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mizuki Y, Fujiwara I, Yamaguchi T. Pharmacokinetic interactions related to the chemical structure of fluoroquinolones. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 37Suppl. A: S41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gootz TD, Brighty KE. Fluoroquinolone antibiotics: SAR mechanism of action, resistance, and clinical effects. Med Res Rev 1996; 16: 433–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Andriole VT. The future of the quinolones. Drugs 1993; 45Suppl. 3: 1–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tillotson GS. Quinolones: structure-activity relationships and future predictions. J Medical Microbiol 1996; 44: 320–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wolfson JS, Hooper DC. Fluoroquinolone antimicrobial agents. Clin Microbiol Rev 1989; 2: 378–424PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hooper DC, Wolfson JS. Fluoroquinolone antimicrobial agents. N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 381–94Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hendershot EF. Fluoroquinolones. Infect Dis Clin North Am 1995; 9: 715–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lesher G, Forelich E, Gruett M, et al. 1,8-Napthyridine derivatives, a new class of chemotherapeutic agents. J Med Chem 1962; 5: 1063–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yanagisawa H, Nakao H, Ando A. Chemotherapeutic agents. I. Synthesis of quinolone and naphthyridine sulfone or phos- phonic acid derivatives. Chem Pharm Bull 1973; 21: 1080–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Douet C, Charpiat B, Peyramond D, et al. Value of the use of the oral route versus the injectable route for fluoroquinolones. Pharmacoeconomic incidence and bibliographical study. Therapie 1996; 51: 464–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pocidalo J. Use of fluoroquinolones for intracellular pathogens. Rev Infec Dis 1989; 11 Suppl.: S979–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    DuPont HL. Quinolones in Salmonella typhi infection. Drugs 1993; 45Suppl. 3: 119–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Baltch AL, Smith RP, Ritz W. Inhibitory and bactericidal activities of levofloxacin, ofloxacin, erythromycin, and rifampin used singly and in combination against Legionella pneumophila. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 1661–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Edelstein PH, Edelstein MA, Lehr KH, et al. In vitro activity of levofloxacin against clinical isolates of Legionella spp, its pharmacokinetics in guinea pigs, and use in experimental Legionella pneumophila pneumonia. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 37: 117–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chérubin CE, Stratton CW. Assessment of the bactericidal activity of sparfloxacin, ofloxacin, levofloxacin, and other fluoroquinolones compared with selected agents of proven efficacy against Listeria monocytogenes. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1994; 20: 21–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Boisivon A, Dhoyen N, Carbon C. Activity of CI-960 alone and in combination with amoxycillin against Listeria monocytogenes, and comparison with other quinolones. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 36: 527–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Peloquin CA, Berning SE. Infection caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Ann Pharmacother 1994; 28: 72–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kaplan JA, Krieff DM. Quinolones for the treatment and prophylaxis of tuberculosis. Ann Pharmacother 1996; 30: 1020–2PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kimura M, Kishimoto T, Niki Y, et al. In vitro antichlamydial activities of newly developed quinolone antimicrobial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 801–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Soejima R, Niki Y, Kishimoto T, et al. Antichlamydial activities of newly developed fluoroquinolones and their potential future role in the treatment of chlamydial respiratory infections. Drugs 1995; 49Suppl. 2: 257–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cormican MG, Jones RN. Cross-resistance analysis for clinafloxacin compared with ciprofloxacin, fleroxacin, ofloxacin, and sparfloxacin using predictor panels of ciprofloxacin-resistant bacteria. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 36: 431–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tack KJ, McGuire NM, Eiseman IA. Initial clinical experience with clinafloxacin in the treatment of serious infections. Drugs 1995; 49Suppl. 2: 488–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Maxwell A. The molecular basis of quinolone action. J Antimicrob Chemother 1992; 30: 409–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Franklin TJ. Factors affecting the penetration of antibiotics into bacteria. In: Spencer B, editor. Industrial aspects of biochemestry. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1974: 549–77Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ashby J, Piddock LJV, Wise R. An investigation of the hyperphobicity of the quinolones. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 16: 805–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Celesk RA, Robillard NJ. Factors influencing the accumulation of ciprofloxacin in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989; 33: 1921–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Piddock LJV. Mechanisms of quinolone uptake into bacterial cells. J Antimicrob Chemother 1991; 27: 399–403PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bryan LE, Bedard J. Impermeability to quinolones in gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1991; 10: 232–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Thompson KS, Sanders CC, Hayden ME. In vitro studies with five quinolones: evidence for changes in relative potency as quinolone resistance rises. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35: 2329–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hancock REW, Bellido F. Antibiotic uptake: unusual results for unusual molecules. J Antimicrob Chemother 1992; 29: 235–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bazile S, Moreau N, Bouzard D, et al. Relationships among antibacterial activity, inhibition of DNA gyrase, and intracellular accumulation of 11 fluoroquinolones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 2622–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Asuquo AE, Piddock LJV. Accumulation and killing kinetics of fifteen quinolones for Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother 1993; 31: 865–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Klopman G, Macina OT, Levinson ME, et al. Computer automated structure evaluation of quinolone antibacterial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987; 31: 1831–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hancock REW, Raffle VJ. Involvement of the outer membrane in gentamicin and streptomycin uptake and killing in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrobial Agents Chemother 1981; 19: 777–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Stratton CW. Mechanisms of action for antimicrobial agents: general principles and mechanisms for selected classes of antibiotics. In: Lorian V, editor. Antibiotics in laboratory medicine. 4th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1996: 579–603Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Dougherty TJ, Saukkonen JJ. Membrane permeability changes associated with DNA gyrase inhibitors in Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1985; 28: 200–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hancock REW. Alterations in outer membrane permeability. Annu Rev Microbiol 1984; 38: 237–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Rogers SW, Gilleland HE, Eagon RG. Characterization of a protein-lipopolysaccharide complex released from cell walls of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by ethylene-diaminetetraacetic acid}. Can J Microbiol 1964; 15: 743–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Leive L. Studies on the permeability change produced in coli- form bacteria by ethylene-diaminetetra-acetate. J Biol Chem 1968; 243: 2373–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Leive L. The barrier function of the Gram-negative envelope. Ann N Y Acad sci 1974; 235: 109–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Vaara M. Polycations sensitize enteric bacteria to antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1983; 24: 107–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Vaara M, Vaara T. Polycations as outer membrane-disorganizing agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1983; 24: 114–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Schindler PRG, Teuber M. Action of polymyxin B on bacterial membranes: morphological changes in the cytoplasm and in the outer membrane of Salmonella typhimurium and Escherichia coli B. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1975; 8: 95–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Yassien M, Khardori N, Ahmedy A, et al. Modulation of biofilms of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by quinolones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 2262–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Newton BA. Reversal of the antimicrobial activity of polymyxin by divalent cations. Nature (London) 1953; 172: 160–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Domagala JM, Bridges AJ, Culbertson TP, et al. Synthesis and biological activity of 5-amino and 5-hydroxyquinolones, and the overwhelming influence of the remote N1-substituent in determining the structure-activity relationship. J Med Chem 1991; 34: 1142–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hutt AJ, O'Grady J. Drug chirality: a consideration of the significance of the stereochemistry of antimicrobial agents. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 37: 7–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    von Eiff C, Peters GI. In vitro activity of ofloxacin and D-ofloxacin against staphylococci. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 38: 259–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Johnson CC. In vitro testing: correlations of bacterial susceptibility, body fluid levels, and effectiveness of antimicrobial therapy. In: Lorian V, editor. Antibiotics in laboratory medicine. 4th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1996: 814Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Dorr MB, Webb CL, Bron N, et al. Single dose tolerance and pharmacokinetics of CI-960 (PD 127391) in healthy volunteers [abstract 1154]. Presented at the 31st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1991 Sep 29–Oct 2; Chicago, Illinois. Washington DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1991Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Canter D. CI-960 status report. Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA: Parke-Davis Research facility, Feb 1996 (data on file)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Weinand DK. Personal communication. Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA: Parke-Davis Research facility, April 1997 (data on file)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Rodvold KA, Piscitelli SC. New oral macrolides and fluoroquinolone antibiotics: an overview of pharmacokinetics, interactions, and safety. Clin Infect Dis 1993; 17Suppl. 1: S192–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ooie T, Suzuki H, Terasaki T, et al. Characterization of the transport properties of a quinolone antibiotic, fleroxacin, in rat choroid plexus. Pharm Res 1996; 13: 523–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Morrison A, Cozzarelli NR. Site-specific cleavage of DNA by E. coli DNA gyrase. Cell 1979; 17: 175–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Critchlow SE, Maxwell A. DNA cleavage is not required for the binding of quinolone drugs to the DNA gyrase-DNA complex. Biochem 1996; 35: 7387–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Carrer G, Flandrois JP, Lobry JR. Biphasic kinetics of bacterial killing by quinolones. J Antimicrob Chemother 1991; 27: 319–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Little JW, Mount DW. The SOS regulatory system of Escherichia coli. Cell 1982; 29: 11–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Lewin CS, Howard BMA, Ratclife NT, et al. Four quinolones and the SOS response. J Med Microbiol 1989; 29: 139–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Piddock LJV, Walters RN, Diver JM. Correlation of quinolone MIC and inhibition of DNA, RNA and protein synthesis and induction of the SOS response in Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 2331–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Piddock LJV, Walters RN. Bactericidal activities of five quinolones for Escherichia coli strains with mutations in genes encoding the SOS response or cell division. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 819–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Blaser J, Stone BB, Groner MC, et al. Comparative study with enoxacin and netilmycin in a pharmacodynamic model to determine importance of ratio of antibiotic peak concentration to MIC for bactericidal activity and emergence of resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987; 31: 1054–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Drusano GL, Johnson DE, Rosen M, et al. Pharmacodynamics of a fluoroquinolone antimicrobial agent in a neutropenic rat model of Pseudomonus sepsis}. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 483–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Meng X, Pei Y, Nightingale CH, et al. Determination of the in vivo post-antibiotic effects of ciprofloxacin and rifampicin. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 36: 987–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Sesnie JC, Courtney CL, Desaty TM, et al. In vivo efficacy of PD 127391 (CI-960) in a Pseudomonus aeruginosa mouse renal model [abstract 1153]. Presented at the 31st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1991 Sep 29–Oct 2; Chicago, Illinois. Washington DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1991Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    McGrath BJ, Marchbanks CR, Gilbert D, et al. In vitro postantibiotic effect following repeated exposure to imipenen, temafloxacin, and tobramycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 1723–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Pastor A, Peman J, Canton E. In vitro postantibiotic effect of sparfloxacin and ciprofloxacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus faecalis. J Antimicrob Chemother 1994; 34: 679–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Hostacka A. Postantibiotic effects of suprainhibitory and postantibiotic effects of subinhibitory concentrations of quinolones on Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Epidemiol Mikrobiol Immunol 1996; 45: 56–8Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kitamura A, Hoshino K, Kimura Y, et al. Contribution of the C-8 substituent of DU-6859, a new potent fluoroquinolone, to its activity against DNA gyrase mutants of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 1467–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Dalhoff A. Quinolone resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. Development during therapy and clinical significance. Infection 1994; 22Suppl. 2: S111–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Piddock LJ. Mechanisms of resistance to fluoroquinolones: state-of-the-art 1992-1994. Drugs 1995; 49Suppl. 2: 29–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Hooper DC. Bacterial resistance to fluoroquinolones: mechanisms and patterns. Adv Exper Med Biol 1995; 390: 49–57Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Willmott CJ, Maxwell A. A single point mutation in the DNA gyrase A protein greatly reduces binding of fluoroquinolones to the gyrase-DNA complex. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 126–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Zhanel GG, Karlowsky JA, Saunders MH, et al. Development of multiple-antibiotic-resistance (Mar) mutants of Pseudomonas aeruginosa after serial exposure to fluoroquinolones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 489–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Goldman JD, White DG, Levy SB. Multiple antibiotic resistance (mar) locus protects Escherichia coli from rapid killing by fluoroquinolones. Antimicrobial Agents Chemother 1996; 40: 1266–9Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Goldstein EJC, Citron DM. Comparative activity of ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin, sparfloxacin, temofloxacin, CI-960, CI-990, and WIN 57273 against anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 1158–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Wexler HM, Molitoris E, Reeves D. In vitro activity of clinafloxacin (CI-960) and PD 131628-2 against anaerobic bacteria. J Antimicrob Chemother 1994; 34: 343–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Borobio MV, del Carmen Conejo M, Ramirez E, et al. Comparative activities of eight quinolones against members of the Bacteroides fragilis group. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 1442–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Lewin CS, Amyes SGB. Bactericidal action of PD127,391, an enhanced spectrum quinolone. J Med Microbiol 1990; 33: 67–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Fuchs PC, Barry AL, Pfaller MA, et al. Multicenter evaluation of the in vitro activities of three new quinolones, sparfloxacin, CI-960, and PD 131,628, compared with the activity of ciprofloxacin against 5,252 clinical bacterial isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1991; 35: 764–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Vazquez JA, Donabedian S, Perri MB, et al. Sparfloxacin and CI-960 for therapy of experimental ampicillin resistant enterococcal endocarditis [abstract 1151]. Presented at the 31st Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1991 Sep 29–Oct 2; Chicago, Illinois. Washington DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1991Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Kaatz GW, Seo SM, Lamp KC. CI-960, a new fluoroquinolone, for therapy of experimental ciprofloxacin-susceptible and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 1192–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Perri MB, Chow JW, Zervos M.J. In vitro activity of sparfloxacin and clinafloxacin against multi-drug resistant enterococci. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1993; 17: 151–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Meservey MA, Yoder SL, Cohen MA. Efficacy of clinafloxacin (CI-960) and CI-990 in Staphylococcus-induced abscess in mice [abstract 306]. Presented at the 33rd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1993 Oct 17–20; New Orleans, Louisiana. Washington DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1993Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Burney S, Landman D, Quale JM. Activity of clinafloxacin against multi-drug resistant Enterococcus faecium. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 1668–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Ford AS, Baltch AL, Smith RP, et al. In vitro susceptibilities of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Pseudomonas spp. to the new fluoroquinolones clinafloxacin and PD 131628 and nine other antimicrobial agents}. J Antimicrob Chemother 1993; 31: 523–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Pankuch GA, Jacobs MR, Applebaum PC. Susceptibilities of 123 strains of Xanthomonas maltophilia to clinafloxacin, PD 131628, PD 138312, PD 140248, ciprofloxacin, and ofloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 369–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Harrington GD, Zarins LT, Ramsey MA, et al. Susceptibility of ciprofloxacin-resistant staphylococci and enterococci to clinafloxacin. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1995; 21: 27–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Cohen MA, Gage JW, Huband MD, et al. Efficacy of quinolones in preventing Staphylococcus aureus-induced abscess in mice. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 36: 551–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Cohen, MA, Yoder SL, Huband MD, et al. In vitro and in vivo activities of clinafloxacin, CI-990 (PD 131112), and PD 138312 versus enterococci. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 2123–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Zaman M, Burney S, Landman D, et al. Therapy of experimental endocarditis due to multidrug-resistant Enterococcus faecium with clinafloxacin and penicillin [abstract 35]. Presented at the 35th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1995 Sep 17–20; San Francisco, California. Washington DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1995Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Carlyn CJ, Doyle LJ, Knapp MD, et al. Activities of three investigational fluoroquinolones (BAY y 3118, DU-6859a, and clinafloxacin) against Neisseria gonorrhoeae isolates with diminished susceptibilities to ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 1606–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Visalli MA, Jacobs MR, Appelbaum PC. Activity of trovafloxacin compared to 7 other agents against 458 gram-negative nonfermentors [abstract E86]. Presented at the 36th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1996 Sep 15–18; New Orleans, Louisiana. Washington DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1996Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Cohen MA, Huband MD, Gage JW, et al. In vitro activity of clinafloxacin, trovafloxacin, and ciprofloxacin [abstract E85]. Presented at the 36th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1996 Sep 15–18; New Orleans, Louisiana. Washington DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1996Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Itokazu GS, Nathan C, Hariharan R, et al. The comparative in vitro activity of clinafloxacin and other antimicrobials against vancomycin-susceptible and vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Chemotherapy 1996; 42: 235–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Visalli MA, Jacobs MR, Appelbaum PC. Antipneumococcal activity of Bay 12-8039, a new quinolone, compared to 3 other quinolones and 5 beta-lactams [abstract F6]. Presented at the 36th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1996 Sep 15–18; New Orleans, Louisiana. Washington DC: American Society for Microbiology, 1996Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Visalli MA, Jacobs MR, Appelbqum PC. Activity of CP 99,219 (trovafloxacin) compared with ciprofloxacin, sparfloxacin, clinafloxacin, lomefloxacin, and cefuroxime against ten penicillin-susceptible and penicillin-resistant pneumococci by time-kill methodology. J Antimicrob Chemother 1996; 37: 77–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Burnett RJ, Haverstock DC, Dellinger EP, et al. Definition of the role of enterococcus in intraabdominal infection: analysis of a prospective randomized trial. Surgery 1995; 118: 716–21; Discussion: 721-3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Deamer RL, Prichard JG, Koenker N, et al. Temafloxacin-induced hemolytic anemia and renal failure. Clin Pharm 1993; 12: 380–2PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Blum MD, Graham DJ, McCloskey CA. Temafloxacin syndrome: review of 95 cases. Clin Infect Dis 1994; 18: 946–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Finch RG. The withdrawal of temafloxacin. Are there implications for other quinolones? Drug Saf 1993; 8: 9–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Christ W, Lehnert T, Ulbrich B. Specific toxicologic aspects of the quinolones. Rev Infect Dis 1988; 10Suppl. 1: S141–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Stahlmann R. Safety profile of the quinolones. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 26Suppl. D: S31–44Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Paton JH, Reeves DS. Clinical features and management of adverse effects of quinolone antibacterials. Drug Saf 1991; 6: 8–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Norrby SR, Lietman PS. Safety and tolerability of fluoroquinolones. Drugs 1993; 45Suppl. 3: 59–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Leitman PS. Fluoroquinolone toxicities: an update. Drugs 1995; 49Suppl. 2: 159–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Elsea SH, Osheroff N, Nitiss JL. Cytotoxicity of quinolones toward eukaryotic cells. J Biol Chem 1992; 267: 13150–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Suto MJ, Domagala JM, Roland GE, et al. Fluoroquinolones: relationships between structural variation, mammalian cell cytotoxicity, and antimicrobial activity. J Medicinal Chem 1992; 35: 4745–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Osheroff N, Corbett AH, Elsea SH, et al. Defining functional drug-interaction domains on topisomerase II by exploiting mechanistic differences between drug classes. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1994; 34 Suppl.: S19–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Robinson MJ, Martin BA, Gootz TD, et al. Effects of novel fluoroquinolones on the catalytic activities of eukaryotic topoisomerase II: influence of the C-8 fluorine group. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992; 36: 751–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Bruzzone R. The molecular basis of enzyme secretion. Gastroenterology 1990; 99: 1157–76PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Moore MR. Biochemistry of porphyria. Int J Biochem 1993; 10: 1353–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Niki Y, Hashiguchi K, Okimoto N, et al. Quinolone antimicrobial agents and theophylline. Chest 1992; 101: 881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Fuhr U, Wolff T, Harder S, et al. Quinolone inhibition of cytochrome P450-dependent caffeine metabolism in human liver microsomes. Drug Metab Disp 1990; 18: 1005–10Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Akahane K, Sekiguchi MA, Une T, et al. Structure-epileptogenicity relationship of quinolones with special reference to their interaction with gamma-aminobutyric acid receptor sites. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989; 33: 1704–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Halliwell RF, Davey PG, Lambert JJ. Antagonism of GABAA receptors by 4-quinolones. J Antimicrob Chemother 1993; 31: 457–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Wainwright NJ, Collins P, Ferguson J. Photosensitivity associated with antibacterial agents. Drug Saf 1993; 9: 437–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Kurata M, Kasuga Y, Nanba E, et al. Flush incuded by fluoroquinolones in canine skin. Inflamm Res 1995; 44: 461–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Loveday KS. Interrelationship of photocarcinogenicity, photo-mutagenicity and phototoxicity. Photochem Photobiol 1996; 63: 369–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Hayem G, Carbon C. A reappraisal of quinolone tolerability. The experience of their musculoskeletal adverse effects. Drug Saf 1995; 13: 338–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    McGarvey WC, Singh D, Trevino SG. Partial Achilles tendon ruptures associated with fluoroquinolone antibiotics: a case report and literature review. Foot Ankle Int 1996; 17: 496–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Hildebrand H, Kempka G, Schluter G, et al. Chondrotoxicity of quinolones in vivo and in vitro. Arch Toxicol 1993; 67: 411–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Hayem G, Petit PX, Levacher M, et al. Cytofluorometric analysis of chondrotoxicity of fluoroquinolone antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 243–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Arico M, Bossi G, Caselli D, et al. Long-term magnetic resonance survey of cartilage damage in leukemic children treated with fluoroquinolones. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995; 14: 713–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Schaad UB. Use of quinolones in paediatrics. Drugs 1993; 45Suppl. 3: 37–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Dagan R. Fluoroquinolones in paediatrics —1995. Drugs 1995; 49Suppl. 2: 92–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Martell M, de Ben S, Weinberger M, et al. Growth and development of preterm infants receiving fluoroquinolones. J Perinat Med 1996; 24: 287–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Green SD. Indications and restrictions of fluoroquinolone use in children. Br J Hosp Med 1996; 56: 420–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Davis H, McGoodwin E, Reed TG. Anaphylactic reactions reported after treatment with ciprofloxacin. Ann Intern Med 1989; 111: 1041–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Pipek R, Vulfsons S, Wolfovitz E, et al. Case report: ofloxacin-induced hypersensitivity vasculitis. Am J Med sci 1996; 311: 82–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Kaukoranta-Tolvanen S-S, Laitinen K, Saikku P, et al. Chlamydia pneumoniae multiplies in human endothelial cells in vitro. Microb Pathog 1994; 16: 313–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Gaydos CA, Summersgill JT, Sahney NN, et al. Replication of ChlamyJia pneumoniae in vitro in human macrophages, endothelial cells, and aortic smooth muscle cells. Infect Immun 1996; 64: 1614–20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Knoebel E, Vijayagopal P, Figueroa JE, et al. In vitro infection of smooth muscle cells by Chlamydia pneumoniae. Infect Immun 1997; 65: 503–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Buja LM. Does atherosclerosis have an infectious etiology? Circulation 1996; 94: 872–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Ridker PM, Cushman M, Stampfer MJ, et al. Inflammation, aspirin, and the risk of cardiovascular disease in apparently healthy men. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 973–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Maseri A. Inflammation, atherosclerosis, and ischemic events — exploring the dark side of the moon. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 1014–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Ong G, Thomas BJ, Mansfield AO, et al. Detection and widespread distribution of ChlamyJia pneumoniae in the vascular system and its possible implications. J Clin Pathol 1996; 49: 102–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Fryer RH, Schwobe EP, Woods ML, et al. Chlamydia species infect human vascular endothelial cells and induce procoagulant activity. J Invest Med 1997; 45: 168–74Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles W. Stratton
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Pathology, Clinical Microbiology LaboratoryVanderbilt University Medical CenterNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations