4.7 Article

Comparative Efficacies of Tedizolid Phosphate, Vancomycin, and Daptomycin in a Rabbit Model of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Endocarditis

Journal

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 59, Issue 6, Pages 3252-3256

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.04376-14

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Trius Therapeutics, Cubist

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tedizolid, the active component of the prodrug tedizolid phosphate, is a novel oxazolidinone that is approximately 4 times more active by weight than linezolid against Staphylococcus aureus in vitro. The in vivo efficacy of tedizolid phosphate (15 mg/kg body weight intravenous [i.v.] twice a day [b.i.d.]) was compared to those of vancomycin (30 mg/kg i.v. b.i.d.) and daptomycin (18 mg/kg i.v. once a day [q.d.]) in a rabbit model of aortic valve endocarditis (AVE) caused by methicillin-resistant S. aureus strain COL (infection inoculum of 10(7) CFU). Median vegetation titers of daptomycin-treated rabbits were significantly lower than those of rabbits treated with tedizolid phosphate (15 mg/kg b.i.d.) (P = 0.016), whereas titers for vancomycin-treated compared to tedizolid-treated rabbits were not different (P = 0.984). The numbers of organisms in spleen and kidney tissues were similar for all treatment groups. A dose-ranging experiment was performed with tedizolid phosphate (2, 4, and 8 mg/kg b.i.d.) compared to vancomycin (30 mg/kg b.i.d.), using a higher infecting inoculum (10(8) CFU) to determine the lowest efficacious dose of tedizolid phosphate. Tedizolid phosphate (2 mg/kg) (equivalent to 60% of the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC(0-24)) for the human 200-mg dose approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration) was not efficacious. Tedizolid phosphate at 4 mg/kg (equivalent to 75% of the AUC(0-24) for the human 400-mg dose) and 8 mg/kg produced lower vegetation titers than the control, but neither was as efficacious as vancomycin.

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