In Vitro Activities of the Novel Cephalosporin LB against Multidrug-Resistant Staphylococci and Streptococci

Similar documents
2015 Antibiotic Susceptibility Report

2016 Antibiotic Susceptibility Report

Tel: Fax:

2012 ANTIBIOGRAM. Central Zone Former DTHR Sites. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Concise Antibiogram Toolkit Background

BACTERIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY REPORT: 2016 (January 2016 December 2016)

C&W Three-Year Cumulative Antibiogram January 2013 December 2015

Antibiotic. Antibiotic Classes, Spectrum of Activity & Antibiotic Reporting

Over the past several decades, the frequency of. Resistance Patterns Among Nosocomial Pathogens* Trends Over the Past Few Years. Ronald N.

Mercy Medical Center Des Moines, Iowa Department of Pathology. Microbiology Department Antibiotic Susceptibility January December 2016

Intrinsic, implied and default resistance

2010 ANTIBIOGRAM. University of Alberta Hospital and the Stollery Children s Hospital

2017 Antibiogram. Central Zone. Alberta Health Services. including. Red Deer Regional Hospital. St. Mary s Hospital, Camrose

European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

2015 Antibiogram. Red Deer Regional Hospital. Central Zone. Alberta Health Services

EUCAST recommended strains for internal quality control

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: Advanced Course

2016 Antibiogram. Central Zone. Alberta Health Services. including. Red Deer Regional Hospital. St. Mary s Hospital, Camrose

2009 ANTIBIOGRAM. University of Alberta Hospital and the Stollery Childrens Hospital

In vitro Activity of Gemifloxacin Against Recent Clinical Isolates of Bacteria in Korea

Table 1. Commonly encountered or important organisms and their usual antimicrobial susceptibilities.

January 2014 Vol. 34 No. 1

Antimicrobial Activity of Linezolid Against Gram-Positive Cocci Isolated in Brazil

In Vitro Antimicrobial Activity of CP-99,219, a Novel Azabicyclo-Naphthyridone

MICRONAUT MICRONAUT-S Detection of Resistance Mechanisms. Innovation with Integrity BMD MIC

Routine internal quality control as recommended by EUCAST Version 3.1, valid from

Help with moving disc diffusion methods from BSAC to EUCAST. Media BSAC EUCAST

RCH antibiotic susceptibility data

Antimicrobial susceptibility

INFECTIOUS DISEASES DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY NEWSLETTER

Childrens Hospital Antibiogram for 2012 (Based on data from 2011)

Suggestions for appropriate agents to include in routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing

The β- Lactam Antibiotics. Munir Gharaibeh MD, PhD, MHPE School of Medicine, The University of Jordan November 2018

Epidemiology and Microbiology of Surgical Wound Infections

4 th and 5 th generation cephalosporins. Naderi HR Associate professor of Infectious Diseases

against Clinical Isolates of Gram-Positive Bacteria

Appropriate antimicrobial therapy in HAP: What does this mean?

National Clinical Guideline Centre Pneumonia Diagnosis and management of community- and hospital-acquired pneumonia in adults

European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Dalbavancin, enterococci, Gram-positive cocci, Latin America, staphylococci, streptococci

What s new in EUCAST methods?

56 Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. All rights reserved.

SUPPLEMENT ARTICLE. S114 CID 2001:32 (Suppl 2) Diekema et al.

جداول میکروارگانیسم های بیماریزای اولویت دار و آنتی بیوتیک های تعیین شده برای آزمایش تعیین حساسیت ضد میکروبی در برنامه مهار مقاومت میکروبی

Received 5 February 2004/Returned for modification 16 March 2004/Accepted 7 April 2004

Aberdeen Hospital. Antibiotic Susceptibility Patterns For Commonly Isolated Organisms For 2015

THE NAC CHALLENGE PANEL OF ISOLATES FOR VERIFICATION OF ANTIBIOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING METHODS

CONTAGIOUS COMMENTS Department of Epidemiology

GENERAL NOTES: 2016 site of infection type of organism location of the patient

CONTAGIOUS COMMENTS Department of Epidemiology

ANTIBIOTICS USED FOR RESISTACE BACTERIA. 1. Vancomicin

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Patterns

Antimicrobial Pharmacodynamics

a. 379 laboratories provided quantitative results, e.g (DD method) to 35.4% (MIC method) of all participants; see Table 2.

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: The Basics

Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance from sentinel public hospitals, South Africa, 2013

Activity of Linezolid Tested Against Uncommonly Isolated Gram-positive ACCEPTED

Antimicrobial Cycling. Donald E Low University of Toronto

Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibilities of bacteria isolated from blood cultures of hospitalized patients in the United States in 2002

Bacterial Resistance of Respiratory Pathogens. John C. Rotschafer, Pharm.D. University of Minnesota

Antimicrobial Resistance Trends in the Province of British Columbia

MICHAEL A. PFALLER,* RONALD N. JONES, GARY V. DOERN, KARI KUGLER, AND THE SENTRY PARTICIPANTS GROUP

CONTAGIOUS COMMENTS Department of Epidemiology

Background and Plan of Analysis

Chemotherapy of bacterial infections. Part II. Mechanisms of Resistance. evolution of antimicrobial resistance

The Basics: Using CLSI Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Standards

ANTIMICROBIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY DETECTION OF ELEVATED MICs TO PENICILLINS IN β- HAEMOLYTIC STREPTOCOCCI

MICHAEL J. RYBAK,* ELLIE HERSHBERGER, TABITHA MOLDOVAN, AND RICHARD G. GRUCZ

Compliance of manufacturers of AST materials and devices with EUCAST guidelines

Available online at ISSN No:

ORIGINAL ARTICLE. Focus Technologies, Inc., 1 Hilversum, The Netherlands, 2 Herndon, Virginia and 3 Franklin, Tennessee, USA

ESCMID Online Lecture Library. by author

Original Articles. K A M S W Gunarathne 1, M Akbar 2, K Karunarathne 3, JRS de Silva 4. Sri Lanka Journal of Child Health, 2011; 40(4):

BactiReg3 Event Notes Module Page(s) 4-9 (TUL) Page 1 of 21

British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

2015 Antimicrobial Susceptibility Report

EDUCATIONAL COMMENTARY - Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: An Update

What s new and not so new on the antimicrobial horizon? G. L. French

microbiology testing services

Understanding the Hospital Antibiogram

Einheit für pädiatrische Infektiologie Antibiotics - what, why, when and how?

Evaluation of the BIOGRAM Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test System

Susceptibility Testing and Resistance Phenotypes Detection in Bacterial Pathogens Using the VITEK 2 System

ß-lactams. Sub-families. Penicillins. Cephalosporins. Monobactams. Carbapenems

Update on Resistance and Epidemiology of Nosocomial Respiratory Pathogens in Asia. Po-Ren Hsueh. National Taiwan University Hospital

21 st Expert Committee on Selection and Use of Essential Medicines Peer Review Report Antibiotics Review

Antimicrobial Resistance Trends in the Province of British Columbia. August Epidemiology Services British Columbia Centre for Disease Control

CAP Laboratory Improvement Programs. Performance Accuracy of Antibacterial and Antifungal Susceptibility Test Methods

PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen

In vitro activity of telavancin against recent Gram-positive clinical isolates: results of the Prospective European Surveillance Initiative

Approach to pediatric Antibiotics

Compliance of manufacturers of AST materials and devices with EUCAST guidelines

Management of Hospital-acquired Pneumonia

Leveraging the Lab and Microbiology Department to Optimize Stewardship

Performance Information. Vet use only

Jasmine M. Chaitram, 1,2 * Laura A. Jevitt, 1,2 Sara Lary, 1,2 Fred C. Tenover, 1,2 and The WHO Antimicrobial Resistance Group 3,4

Other Beta - lactam Antibiotics

Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is the second

Antimicrobial activity of ceftobiprole against Gram-negative and Gram-positive pathogens: results from INVITA-A-CEFTO Brazilian study

Transcription:

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY, Jan. 2004, p. 53 62 Vol. 48, No. 1 0066-4804/04/$08.00 0 DOI: 10.1128/AAC.48.1.53 62.2004 Copyright 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved. In Vitro Activities of the Novel Cephalosporin LB 11058 against Multidrug-Resistant Staphylococci and Streptococci Helio S. Sader, 1,2 * David M. Johnson, 1 and Ronald N. Jones 1,3 The JONES Group/JMI Laboratories, North Liberty, Iowa 1 ; Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil 2 ; and Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 3 Received 5 June 2003/Returned for modification 7 August 2003/Accepted 3 October 2003 LB 11058 is a novel parenteral cephalosporin with a C-3 pyrimidinyl-substituted vinyl sulfide group and a C-7 2-amino-5-chloro-1,3-thiazole group. This study evaluated the in vitro activity and spectrum of LB 11058 against 1,245 recent clinical isolates, including a subset of gram-positive strains with specific resistant phenotypes. LB 11058 was very active against Streptococcus pneumoniae. The novel cephalosporin was 8- to 16-fold more potent than ceftriaxone, cefepime, or amoxicillin-clavulanate against both penicillin-intermediate and -resistant S. pneumoniae. LB 11058 was also very active against both -hemolytic streptococci (MIC at which 90% of isolates were inhibited [MIC 90 ], <0.008 g/ml) and viridans group streptococci (MIC 90, 0.03 to 0.5 g/ml), including penicillin-resistant strains. Among oxacillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus, LB 11058 MIC results varied from 0.06 to 0.25 g/ml (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ml), while among oxacillin-resistant strains LB 11058 MICs varied from 0.25 to 1 g/ml (MIC 50,1 g/ml). Coagulase-negative staphylococci showed an LB 11058 susceptibility pattern similar to that of S. aureus, with all isolates being inhibited at <1 g/ml. LB 11058 also showed reasonable in vitro activity against Enterococcus faecalis, including vancomycin-resistant strains (MIC 50,1 g/ml), and Bacillus spp. (MIC 50, 0.25 g/ml); however, it was less active against Enterococcus faecium (MIC 50, >64 g/ml) and Corynebacterium spp. (MIC 50,32 g/ml). Against gram-negative pathogens, LB 11058 showed activity against Haemophilus influenzae (MIC 90, 0.25 to 0.5 g/ml) and Moraxella catarrhalis (MIC 90, 0.25 g/ml), with MICs not influenced by -lactamase production. In conclusion, LB 11058 demonstrated a broad antibacterial spectrum and was highly active against gram-positive bacteria, particularly against multidrug-resistant staphylococci and streptococci. Gram-positive bacterial pathogens have shown a remarkable ability to develop resistance to antimicrobial agents. Oxacillinand glycopeptide-resistant staphylococci, glycopeptide-resistant enterococci, and penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae and viridans streptococci have forced clinicians to seek alternative treatments for patients with serious gram-positive infections (1, 2, 3, 11, 15, 16). Oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) represents an important worldwide problem, and its prevalence may vary significantly from hospital to hospital. Data from the global SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program and other surveillance programs revealed a high and increasing prevalence of this pathogen in the United States, Latin America, and several regions of Europe (5; European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System [http://www.earss.rivm.nl], accessed 24 September 2003). Over the past few years, MRSA has acquired stable resistance to most clinically available antimicrobial agents, and therapeutic options have been limited to the glycopeptides (vancomycin and teicoplanin) and, more recently, quinupristin-dalfopristin and linezolid (4, 7). However, clinical isolates with reduced susceptibilities to these latter compounds have recently been described in several regions of the world (5, 7, 13). Most MRSA isolates show resistance to virtually all -lactams by production of penicillinase and a low-affinity penicillin-binding protein (PBP) called PBP 2a. * Corresponding author. Mailing address: The JONES Group/JMI Laboratories, Inc., 345 Beaver Kreek Centre, Suite A, North Liberty, IA 52317. Phone: (319) 665-3370. Fax: (319) 665-3371. E-mail: heliosader@jmilabs.com. -Lactams with relatively high affinities for PBP 2a, such as penicillin, ampicillin, and amoxicillin, combined with -lactamase inhibitors have demonstrated in vitro and in vivo anti- MRSA activities (10). However, the addition of critical amounts of -lactamase inhibitor are necessary to successfully treat these infections. Thus, -lactams must combine both high affinity for PBP 2a and stability against degradation by staphylococci penicillinase to be considered for clinical use against infections caused by this pathogen (2, 12). S. pneumoniae is the most commonly identified bacterial cause of community-acquired pneumonia, otitis media, and meningitis, and it is a frequent pathogen in bacteremia (6, 21). Morbidity and mortality may be high among patients with bacteremia and meningitis, especially when appropriate antimicrobial therapy is delayed. The emergence of S. pneumoniae with antimicrobial resistance has also become a matter of major concern. Resistance to penicillin and other antimicrobial agents has increased significantly in the last decade, making the treatment of serious infections very difficult, especially among children (15, 16, 19, 20, 22). LB 11058 is a novel parenteral cephalosporin with a C-3 pyrimidinyl-substituted vinyl sulfide group and a C-7 2-amino- 5-chloro-1,3-thiazole group (Fig. 1). Preliminary studies have indicated that this compound has potent in vitro activity against gram-positive bacteria, including multidrug-resistant staphylococci and streptococci. This study was designed to confirm and extend the earlier presentations about the potency and spectrum of LB 11058 (Y. Cho, M. Kim, C. S. Lee, and H. Youn, 42nd Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., abstr. F-330, 2002; H. Joo, J. E. Shin, I. H. Choi, D. H. Park, 53

54 SADER ET AL. ANTIMICROB. AGENTS CHEMOTHER. FIG. 1. Chemical structure of LB 11058. S. H. Kim, S. H. Lee, and H. Youn, 42nd Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., abstr. F-331, 2002; C. Lee, Y. Jang, K. Koo, Y. Cho, 42nd Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., abstr. F-329, 2002). MATERIALS AND METHODS Antimicrobials tested. The LB 11058 reagent-grade compound was provided by LG Life Science, Ltd. (Taejon, South Korea). Comparator agents were purchased from Sigma Chemical Co. (St. Louis, Mo.) or obtained from their respective manufacturers in the United States. A total of 31 comparators were evaluated, depending upon the species tested. These compounds included -lactams (penicillins, cephalosporins, penicillin -lactamase inhibitor combinations, a monobactam, and a carbapenem), fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and several gram-positive-focused agents (macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramins, glycopeptides, and oxazolidinones). Organisms tested. A total of 1,245 well-characterized strains derived from numerous laboratories worldwide, including a subset of gram-positive strains with specific resistant phenotypes, were processed in the study. Only nonduplicate isolates judged to be clinically significant by local criteria were included in the study. All isolates were collected in 2002, except some isolates of the multidrug-resistant subset. The collection of organisms included 102 isolates of -hemolytic streptococci, 205 S. pneumoniae isolates (103 penicillin nonsusceptible), 106 isolates of viridans group streptococci (54 penicillin nonsusceptible), 163 S. aureus isolates (110 MRSA), 101 coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS; 76 oxacillin resistant), 64 Enterococcus faecalis isolates (20 vancomycin resistant), 63 Enterococcus faecium isolates (33 vancomycin resistant), 17 Enterococcus spp. isolates, 20 Bacillus spp. isolates, 20 Corynebacterium spp., 203 Haemophilus influenzae isolates (101 -lactamase positive), 102 Moraxella catarrhalis isolates, 31 Enterobacteriaceae isolates, and 12 isolates of nonfermentative gram-negative bacilli. The subsets of multidrug-resistant gram-positive strains included six staphylococci with elevated vancomycin MICs (vancomycin-intermediate or -resistant staphylococci), 10 linezolid-nonsusceptible strains, and 20 quinupristindalfopristin (Synercid)-nonsusceptible strains. Susceptibility testing methods. LB 11058 MICs were determined by the reference methods according to procedures recommended by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) (17, 18). On each day of testing, a fresh stock solution (1,280 g/ml) of LB 11058 was prepared and then serially diluted for a testing concentration range of 0.008 to 64 g/ml. Supplemented 5% lysed horse blood was added for testing Streptococcus spp. and Corynebacterium spp., and Haemophilus test medium was utilized for testing H. influenzae. The MICs were interpreted according to NCCLS criteria (18). Quality control was monitored using the following organisms: S. pneumoniae ATCC 49619, E. faecalis ATCC 29212, S. aureus ATCC 29213, Escherichia coli ATCC 25923, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853. RESULTS The in vitro activities of LB 11058 in comparison to numerous other antimicrobial agents against gram-positive bacteria are summarized in Table 1. LB 11058 was very potent against -hemolytic streptococci, with all strains being inhibited at 0.015 g/ml (MIC at which 90% of isolates were inhibited [MIC 90 ], 0.008 g/ml). LB 11058 was the most potent compound tested against S. pneumoniae. Against S. pneumoniae, LB 11058 activity varied according to the susceptibility to penicillin. Penicillin-susceptible strains (MIC 90, 0.008 g/ml) were very susceptible to LB 11058, while penicillin-intermediate strains (MIC 90, 0.06 g/ml) and penicillin-resistant strains (MIC 90, 0.12 g/ml) showed slightly higher LB 11058 MIC results (0.06 to 0.25 g/ml). The novel cephalosporin was 8- to 16-fold more potent than ceftriaxone, cefepime, or amoxicillinclavulanate against both penicillin-intermediate and -resistant strains. Penicillin-susceptible strains were very susceptible to LB 11058 and most antimicrobial agents evaluated, except for the macrolides (92.2 to 93.1% susceptible). Similarly to S. pneumoniae, the susceptibilities of viridans group streptococci to LB 11058 varied according to the penicillin susceptibility. LB 11058 MICs ranged from 0.008 to 0.12 g/ml (MIC 90, 0.03 g/ml) among penicillin-susceptible isolates and from 0.03 to 1 g/ml (MIC 90, 0.5 g/ml) among penicillin-resistant strains. LB 11058 was also the most potent compound tested against viridans group streptococci, being 16-fold more potent than ceftriaxone or cefepime against this pathogen (Table 1). LB 11058 showed potent in vitro activity against S. aureus, including oxacillin-resistant strains. Among oxacillin-susceptible strains, LB 11058 MIC results varied from 0.06 to 0.25 g/ml (MIC 90, 0.25 g/ml), while MRSA LB 11058 MICs ranging from 0.25 to 1 g/ml (MIC 90,1 g/ml). LB 11058 (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ml) was 32-fold more potent than ceftriaxone (MIC 50, 4 g/ml), 16-fold more potent than cefepime (MIC 50,2 g/ml), and 4-fold more potent than oxacillin (MIC 50, 0.5 g/ml) against oxacillin-susceptible isolates; only LB 11058 (MIC 90,1 g/ml), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (MIC 90, 1 g/ml), vancomycin (MIC 90, 2 g/ml), quinupristin-dalfopristin (MIC 90, 0.5 g/ml), and linezolid (MIC 90,2 g/ml) showed reasonable in vitro activities against oxacillin-resistant strains. CoNS showed an LB 11058 susceptibility pattern similar to that shown by S. aureus, with all isolates being inhibited at 1 g/ml. LB 11058 (MIC 90, 0.12 g/ml) was 32-fold more potent than ceftriaxone (MIC 90,4 g/ml) and 16-fold more potent than cefepime (MIC 90,2 g/ml) against oxacillin-susceptible CoNS strains. It was also very active against oxacillin-resistant strains (MIC 90, 0.5 g/ml). LB 11058 and ampicillin were the most active -lactams evaluated against E. faecalis. Most E. faecalis isolates showed LB 11058 MICs of 4 g/ml, except for one isolate which was also resistant to linezolid and showed an LB 11058 MIC of 64 g/ml. All other cephalosporins evaluated showed poor activity against this pathogen. In general, vancomycin-resistant E. faecalis showed LB 11058 MIC results approximately fourfold higher than vancomycin-susceptible E. faecalis (MIC 50, 0.25 and 1 g/ml, respectively). The activity of LB 11058 was higher against E. faecalis (MIC 90,2 g/ml) than against E. faecium (MIC 50, 64 g/ml). Most E. faecium strains showed high MIC results for LB 11058 and most antimicrobial agents evaluated, except quinupristin-dalfopristin and linezolid. LB 11058 (MIC 50, 0.25 g/ml) and imipenem (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ml) were the most potent -lactams tested against Bacillus spp. (Table 1). The vast majority of Bacillus spp. isolates (85%) had LB 11058 MICs of 0.5 g/ml. Several other compounds showed reasonable activity against this pathogen, including clindamycin (MIC 50, 0.5 g/ml), levofloxacin (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ ml), ciprofloxacin (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ml), teicoplanin (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ml), and quinupristin-dalfopristin (MIC 50, 0.5 g/ ml). On the other hand, Corynebacterium spp. showed de-

VOL. 48, 2004 ACTIVITY OF LB 11058 55 TABLE 1. Antimicrobial activities of LB 11058 and selected comparison drugs tested against gram-positive species -Hemolytic streptococci (102) LB 11058 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.015 a Ceftriaxone 0.25 0.25 0.25 100 Cefepime 0.12 0.12 0.12 1 99 Penicillin 0.015 0.06 0.015 0.12 100 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 2 2 2 Erythromycin 0.06 2 0.06 8 82 Clindamycin 0.06 0.06 0.06 8 94 Chloramphenicol 2 4 2 4 100 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 0.5 0.5 2 Ciprofloxacin 0.5 1 0.25 4 Levofloxacin 0.5 1 0.12 2 100 Vancomycin 0.25 0.5 0.12 1 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.25 0.5 0.06 0.5 100 Linezolid 1 1 0.25 2 100 S. pneumoniae, penicillin susceptible (102) LB 11058 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.06 Ceftriaxone 0.015 0.03 0.008 0.12 100 Cefepime 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.5 100 Penicillin 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.12 100 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 0.06 0.06 0.06 100 Erythromycin 0.25 0.25 0.25 16 93 Azithromycin 0.12 0.25 0.12 16 92 Clindamycin 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.5 100 Chloramphenicol 2 4 2 16 99 Ciprofloxacin 1 2 0.03 4 Levofloxacin 1 1 0.03 4 99 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 1 0.5 4 86 Vancomycin 0.25 0.5 0.06 1 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 0.5 0.06 0.5 100 Linezolid 0.5 1 0.25 2 100 S. pneumoniae, penicillin intermediate (52) LB 11058 0.03 0.06 0.008 0.12 Ceftriaxone 0.25 0.5 0.015 2 98 Cefepime 0.25 1 0.06 4 98 Penicillin 0.25 1 0.12 1 0 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 0.25 1 0.06 2 100 Erythromycin 2 32 0.25 32 44 Azithromycin 2 16 0.12 16 46 Clindamycin 0.06 8 0.06 8 80 Chloramphenicol 4 4 2 16 92 Ciprofloxacin 1 2 0.25 4 Levofloxacin 1 1 0.25 4 98 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 2 0.5 2 50 Vancomycin 0.25 0.5 0.06 1 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 0.5 0.12 1 100 Linezolid 0.5 1 0.25 1 100 S. pneumoniae, penicillin resistant (51) LB 11058 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.25 Ceftriaxone 1 1 0.03 8 92 Cefepime 1 2 0.5 2 84 Penicillin 2 4 2 4 0 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 2 8 1 8 65 Erythromycin 4 32 0.25 32 27 Azithromycin 4 16 2 16 26 Clindamycin 0.06 8 0.06 8 74 Chloramphenicol 4 16 2 16 83 Ciprofloxacin 1 2 0.5 4 Levofloxacin 1 1 0.5 4 94 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 2 2 0.5 2 17 Vancomycin 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.5 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 0.5 0.12 1 100 Linezolid 0.5 1 0.25 2 100 Continued on following page

56 SADER ET AL. ANTIMICROB. AGENTS CHEMOTHER. TABLE 1 Continued Viridans group streptococci, penicillin susceptible (52) LB 11058 0.015 0.03 0.008 0.12 Ceftriaxone 0.25 0.5 0.25 2 98 Cefepime 0.12 2 0.12 2 98 Penicillin 0.12 0.12 0.016 0.12 100 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 2 2 2 Erythromycin 0.06 4 0.06 8 71 Clindamycin 0.06 0.06 0.06 8 96 Chloramphenicol 2 4 2 8 98 Ciprofloxacin 1 4 0.25 4 Levofloxacin 1 2 0.25 4 94 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 0.5 0.5 2 Vancomycin 0.5 1 0.12 1 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 1 1 0.06 1 100 Linezolid 1 1 0.12 8 98 Viridans group streptococci, penicillin intermediate (27) LB 11058 0.06 0.5 0.015 0.5 Ceftriaxone 0.5 2 0.25 2 70 Cefepime 0.5 2 0.12 4 82 Penicillin 1 2 0.015 2 0 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 2 4 2 16 Erythromycin 1 4 0.06 8 33 Clindamycin 0.06 1 0.06 8 85 Chloramphenicol 2 4 2 8 96 Ciprofloxacin 2 4 0.12 4 Levofloxacin 1 4 0.12 4 82 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 2 0.5 2 Vancomycin 0.5 0.5 0.25 1 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 1 0.25 2 96 Linezolid 1 1 0.25 2 100 Viridans group streptococci, penicillin resistant (27) LB 11058 0.25 0.5 0.03 1 Ceftriaxone 4 32 1 32 4 Cefepime 4 16 4 16 19 Penicillin 4 32 4 32 0 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 8 16 4 16 Erythromycin 2 8 0.06 8 11 Clindamycin 0.06 8 0.06 8 78 Chloramphenicol 4 8 2 8 85 Ciprofloxacin 2 4 1 4 Levofloxacin 1 2 0.5 4 96 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 2 2 0.5 2 Vancomycin 0.5 1 0.25 1 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 1 0.25 4 89 Linezolid 1 1 0.5 2 100 S. aureus, oxacillin susceptible (53) LB 11058 0.12 0.25 0.06 0.25 Ceftriaxone 4 4 0.5 32 98 Ceftazidime 8 8 4 16 91 Cefepime 2 4 0.5 16 98 Oxacillin 0.5 1 0.12 1 100 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 2 2 2 8 98 Erythromycin 0.5 8 0.25 8 70 Clindamycin 0.12 8 0.06 8 87 Ciprofloxacin 0.5 4 0.12 4 87 Levofloxacin 0.12 4 0.06 4 87 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 0.5 0.5 2 93 Vancomycin 1 1 0.5 2 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.25 0.5 0.12 1 100 Linezolid 2 2 1 2 100 S. aureus, oxacillin resistant (110) LB 11058 1 1 0.25 1 Ceftriaxone 32 32 0.5 32 5 Ceftazidime 16 16 8 16 3 Continued on following page

VOL. 48, 2004 ACTIVITY OF LB 11058 57 TABLE 1 Continued Cefepime 16 16 4 16 20 Oxacillin 8 8 8 0 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 16 16 2 16 6 Erythromycin 8 8 0.25 8 4 Clindamycin 8 8 0.12 8 19 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 0.24 4 6 Levofloxacin 4 4 0.12 4 7 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 1 0.5 2 90 Vancomycin 1 2 0.5 2 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 0.5 0.12 1 100 Linezolid 2 2 0.5 2 100 CoNS, oxacillin susceptible (25) LB 11058 0.06 0.12 0.03 0.12 Ceftriaxone 2 4 1 8 100 Ceftazidime 4 8 2 16 100 Cefepime 0.5 2 0.25 4 100 Oxacillin 0.12 0.25 0.06 0.25 100 Amoxcillin-clavulanate 2 2 2 100 Erythromycin 0.25 8 0.12 8 64 Clindamycin 0.06 0.5 0.06 8 96 Ciprofloxacin 0.25 4 0.12 4 80 Levofloxacin 0.25 4 0.06 4 84 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 2 0.5 2 80 Vancomycin 1 2 0.5 2 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.12 0.5 0.06 0.5 100 Linezolid 1 1 0.25 2 100 CoNS, oxacillin resistant (76) LB 11058 0.5 0.5 0.06 1 Ceftriaxone 16 32 0.25 32 28 Ceftazidime 16 16 2 16 7 Cefepime 8 16 0.12 16 71 Oxacillin 8 8 1 8 0 Amoxcillin-clavulanate 4 16 2 16 70 Erythromycin 8 8 0.06 8 9 Clindamycin 4 8 0.06 8 49 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 0.12 4 40 Levofloxacin 2 4 0.12 4 50 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 2 2 0.5 2 51 Vancomycin 2 2 0.5 2 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.25 0.5 0.06 1 100 Linezolid 1 1 0.5 2 100 Vancomycin-nonsusceptible staphylococci (6) b LB 11058 0.5 1 0.25 1 E. faecalis, vancomycin susceptible (44) LB 11058 0.25 1 0.12 64 Ceftriaxone 32 32 8 32 Cefepime 16 16 8 16 Ampicillin 2 2 2 4 100 Imipenem 2 2 0.5 4 Erythromycin 8 8 0.12 8 16 Chloramphenicol 8 8 4 16 89 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 0.5 4 Levofloxacin 1 4 0.5 4 61 Gentamicin (HL) c 500 1,000 500 1,000 80 Streptomycin (HL) c 1,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 80 Vancomycin 1 2 0.5 4 100 Teicoplanin 0.12 0.25 0.12 0.5 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 8 8 0.5 8 2 Linezolid 1 2 1 2 100 E. faecalis, vancomycin resistant (20) LB 11058 1 4 0.25 4 Ceftriaxone 32 32 32 Cefepime 16 16 16 16 Ampicillin 2 8 2 16 90 Continued on following page

58 SADER ET AL. ANTIMICROB. AGENTS CHEMOTHER. TABLE 1 Continued Imipenem 2 8 0.25 8 Erythromycin 8 8 8 100 Chloramphenicol 8 16 4 16 55 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 1 4 Levofloxacin 4 4 1 4 5 Gentamicin (HL) c 1,000 1,000 500 1,000 20 Streptomycin (HL) c 2,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 20 Vancomycin 16 16 16 0 Teicoplanin 16 16 0.12 16 30 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 8 8 4 8 0 Linezolid 1 2 1 2 100 E faecium, vancomycin susceptible (30) LB 11058 64 64 0.5 64 Ceftriaxone 32 32 4 32 Cefepime 16 16 4 16 Ampicillin 16 16 2 16 21 Imipenem 8 8 1 8 Erythromycin 8 8 0.25 8 4 Chloramphenicol 8 8 4 16 92 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 1 4 Levofloxacin 4 4 2 4 21 Gentamicin (HL) c 500 1,000 500 1,000 79 Streptomycin (HL) c 1,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 52 Vancomycin 1 2 1 4 100 Teicoplanin 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.5 100 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 2 0.25 4 88 Linezolid 2 2 1 2 100 E. faecium, vancomycin resistant (33) LB 11058 64 64 8 64 Ceftriaxone 32 32 32 Cefepime 16 16 16 Ampicillin 16 16 16 0 Imipenem 8 8 8 Erythromycin 8 8 2 8 0 Chloramphenicol 8 8 4 8 100 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 4 Levofloxacin 4 4 4 0 Gentamicin (HL) c 500 1,000 500 1,000 65 Streptomycin (HL) c 2,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 15 Vancomycin 16 16 16 0 Teicoplanin 16 16 0.25 16 12 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 1 0.25 2 96 Linezolid 2 2 1 4 96 Enterococcus spp. (17) LB 11058 1 64 0.25 64 Ceftriaxone 32 32 1 32 Cefepime 16 16 1 16 Ampicillin 2 16 2 16 77 Imipenem 1 8 0.06 8 Erythromycin 2 8 0.06 8 29 Chloramphenicol 4 8 4 8 100 Ciprofloxacin 2 4 0.12 4 41 Levofloxacin 2 4 0.25 4 77 Gentamicin (HL) c 500 500 500 1,000 94 Streptomycin (HL) c 1,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 88 Vancomycin 4 16 0.25 16 71 Teicoplanin 0.5 16 0.12 16 88 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 2 4 0.25 4 24 Linezolid 2 2 1 2 100 Linezolid-resistant strains (10) d LB 11058 0.5 64 0.008 64 Ceftriaxone 32 32 0.25 32 13 Cefepime 16 16 0.12 16 38 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 1 4 13 Vancomycin 2 16 0.5 16 63 Teicoplanin 0.5 16 0.12 16 75 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 8 0.25 8 88 Linezolid 8 8 8 8 0 Continued on following page

VOL. 48, 2004 ACTIVITY OF LB 11058 59 TABLE 1 Continued Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 2 2 0.5 2 38 Quinupristin-dalfopristin-resistant strains (20) e LB 11058 1 64 0.12 64 Ceftriaxone 32 32 8 32 15 Cefepime 16 16 2 16 15 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 1 4 15 Vancomycin 1 16 0.5 16 85 Teicoplanin 0.5 16 0.12 16 85 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 4 8 2 8 0 Linezolid 1 2 0.5 2 100 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 2 0.5 2 55 Bacillus spp. (20) f LB 11058 0.25 4 0.03 4 Ceftriaxone 16 32 0.25 32 Cefepime 16 16 2 16 Penicillin 16 32 0.015 32 Ampicillin 16 16 2 16 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 8 16 2 16 Imipenem 0.12 2 0.06 8 Oxacillin 8 8 0.25 8 Erythromycin 0.25 1 0.06 8 Clindamycin 0.5 1 0.12 2 Chloramphenicol 2 4 2 4 Ciprofloxacin 0.12 0.25 0.06 0.5 Levofloxacin 0.12 0.25 0.06 0.5 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 1 2 0.5 2 Vancomycin 1 1 0.25 2 Teicoplanin 0.12 0.25 0.12 0.5 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.5 1 0.25 2 Linezolid 1 1 0.25 2 Corynebacterium spp. (20) g LB 11058 32 64 0.06 64 Ceftriaxone 32 32 0.25 32 Cefepime 16 16 0.12 16 Penicillin 8 32 0.06 32 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 16 16 2 16 Imipenem 1 8 0.06 8 Oxacillin 8 8 1 8 Erythromycin 4 8 0.06 8 Clindamycin 8 8 0.12 8 Chloramphenicol 2 16 2 16 Ciprofloxacin 4 4 0.12 4 Levofloxacin 4 4 0.12 4 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 2 2 0.5 2 Vancomycin 0.5 0.5 0.12 0.5 Teicoplanin 0.5 1 0.12 1 Quinupristin-dalfopristin 0.12 0.5 0.06 2 Linezolid 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.5 a, no interpretive criteria have been established by the NCCLS. b Vancomycin-intermediate or -resistant staphylococci; includes S. aureus (four strains), S. epidermidis (one strain), and S. haemolyticus (one strain). c High-level (HL) resistance. d Includes E. faecium (four strains), E. faecalis (one strain), S. aureus (three strains), S. epidermidis (one strain), and S. oralis (one strain). e Quinupristin-dalfopristin (Synercid)-resistant strains include E. faecium (nine strains), S. aureus (seven strains), S. epidermidis (two strains), and Staphylococcus spp. (two strains). f Includes Bacillus cereus (seven strains) and Bacillus spp. (13 strains). g Includes Corynebacterium jeikeium (11 strains) and Corynebacterium spp. (nine strains). creased susceptibility to LB 11058 (MIC 90, 64 g/ml) and most antimicrobial agents evaluated, except for vancomycin (MIC 90, 0.5 g/ml), teicoplanin (MIC 90,1 g/ml), quinupristin-dalfopristin (MIC 90, 0.5 g/ml), and linezolid (MIC 90, 0.5 g/ml). Among the special subsets of isolates selected, all vancomycin-nonsusceptible strains (MIC, 4 g/ml) were inhibited at 1 g of LB 11058/ml (Table 1). Also, linezolid resistance did not affect LB 11058 activity among staphylococci and streptococci. All four linezolid-resistant staphylococcal isolates had an

60 SADER ET AL. ANTIMICROB. AGENTS CHEMOTHER. TABLE 2. In vitro activities of LB 11058 and selected comparison drugs tested against gram-negative species H. influenzae, -lactamase negative (102) LB 11058 0.12 0.5 0.015 0.5 a Ceftriaxone 0.06 0.015 0.008 0.03 100 Cefepime 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.5 100 Ampicillin 0.5 1 0.5 1 100 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 0.5 1 0.06 2 100 Erythromycin 4 8 0.25 16 Azithromycin 1 2 0.12 4 100 Chloramphenicol 2 2 2 100 Ciprofloxacin 0.03 0.03 0.03 100 Levofloxacin 0.03 0.03 0.03 100 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 4 0.5 4 80 H. influenzae, -lactamase positive (101) LB 11058 0.12 0.25 0.03 0.5 Ceftriaxone 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.015 100 Cefepime 0.06 0.25 0.06 0.25 100 Ampicillin 4 4 2 4 0 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 1 2 0.25 4 100 Erythromycin 4 8 0.5 16 Azithromycin 1 2 0.12 4 100 Chloramphenicol 2 2 2 16 96 Ciprofloxacin 0.03 0.03 0.03 100 Levofloxacin 0.03 0.03 0.03 100 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 4 0.5 4 96 M. catarrhalis (102) LB 11058 0.03 0.25 0.008 0.5 Ceftriaxone 0.12 0.5 0.008 1 100 Cefepime 0.5 1 0.06 4 99 Ampicillin 1 4 0.5 4 58 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 0.12 0.25 0.06 0.5 100 Erythromycin 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 100 Azithromycin 0.12 0.12 0.12 100 Clarithromycin 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 100 Tetracycline 2 2 2 100 Chloramphenicol 2 2 2 100 Ciprofloxacin 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.06 100 Levofloxacin 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.06 100 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 99 Enterobacteriaceae (31) b LB 11058 2 64 0.015 64 Ceftriaxone 0.25 0.25 0.25 32 87 Ceftazidime 1 1 1 16 81 Cefepime 0.12 0.12 0.12 4 100 Cefoxitin 16 32 2 32 44 Cefuroxime axetil 8 16 1 16 26 Cefazolin 16 16 2 16 32 Ampicillin 16 16 2 16 13 Amoxcillin-clavulanate 16 16 2 16 39 Piperacillin-tazobactam 2 16 0.5 64 90 Aztreonam 0.12 16 0.12 16 87 Imipenem 0.5 1 0.5 2 100 Amikacin 1 4 0.5 8 100 Gentamicin 2 2 2 8 94 Ciprofloxacin 0.03 4 0.03 4 81 Levofloxacin 0.06 4 0.03 4 81 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 2 0.5 2 77 Nonfermentative gram-negative bacilli (12) c LB 11058 8 64 2 64 Ceftriaxone 32 32 8 32 17 Ceftazidime 4 16 2 16 83 Cefepime 4 16 2 16 67 Amoxicillin-clavulanate 16 16 8 16 Piperacillin-tazobactam 8 64 0.5 64 67 Aztreonam 16 16 4 16 17 Continued on following page

VOL. 48, 2004 ACTIVITY OF LB 11058 61 TABLE 2 Continued Imipenem 1 8 0.5 8 58 Amikacin 4 32 0.5 16 75 Gentamicin 8 8 2 8 42 Ciprofloxacin 0.5 4 0.03 4 58 Levofloxacin 0.5 4 0.06 4 75 Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 0.5 2 0.5 2 75 a, no interpretive criteria have been established by the NCCLS. b Includes Citrobacter freundii (three strains), Enterobacter aerogenes (three strains), Enterobacter cloacae (four strains), E. coli (three strains), Klebsiella oxytoca (two strains), K. pneumoniae (four strains), Morganella morganii (three strains), Pantoea agglomerans (four strains), Providencia rettgeri (two strains), and Serratia marcescens (three strains). c Includes Acinetobacter baumannii (four strains), P. aeruginosa (three strains), Pseudomonas fluorescens (two strains), and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (three strains). LB 11058 MIC of 0.5 g/ml, while the linezolid-resistant Streptococcus oralis had a very low LB 11058 MIC ( 0.008 g/ml). Similarly, all quinupristin-dalfopristin-nonsusceptible staphylococci showed LB 11058 MIC results of 2 g/ml. LB 11058 activity against H. influenzae (MIC 90, 0.25 to 0.5 g/ml) was not significantly affected by the production of -lactamase, and it was similar to that of cefepime (MIC 90, 0.12 to 0.25 g/ml) and cefuroxime (MIC 90, 0.12 to 0.25 g/ml), but inferior to ceftriaxone (MIC 90, 0.008 to 0.015 g/ml). Several other compounds demonstrated potent activity against this pathogen. LB 11058 (MIC 50, 0.03 g/ml) was the most potent -lactam tested against M. catarrhalis, followed by ceftriaxone (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ml), amoxicillin-clavulanate (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ ml), and cefepime (MIC 50, 0.5 g/ml) (Table 2). Against a small number of Enterobacteriaceae strains (31), the activity of LB 11058 varied by species, but it was generally (MIC 50,2 g/ml) inferior to that of ceftriaxone (MIC 50, 0.25 g/ml), ceftazidime (MIC 50, 1 g/ml), or cefepime (MIC 50, 0.12 g/ml). The nonfermentative gram-negative bacilli also showed decreased susceptibility to virtually all compounds evaluated when compared to the Enterobacteriaceae (Table 2). DISCUSSION The past decade has seen a significantly increasing problem of antimicrobial resistance among gram-positive bacteria, including multidrug-resistant staphylococci, penicillin-resistant streptococci, and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (1, 3, 5, 15, 16, 21, 22). Oxacillin resistance rates are relatively high in many hospitals worldwide, forcing the use of a glycopeptide or, more recently, linezolid as empirical therapy for suspected nosocomial-acquired staphylococcal infections. Moreover, MRSA has become increasingly described in community-acquired infections in patients who have rarely been hospitalized, raising the question whether penicillinase-resistant penicillins (oxacillin, methicillin, nafcillin, etc.) or cephalosporins should still be used for empirical therapy of community-acquired S. aureus infections (8, 14). One of the most remarkable features of LB 11058 was its in vitro activity against oxacillin-resistant staphylococci. LB 11058 inhibited the growth of all clinical MRSA strains at 1 g/ml, although other -lactam compounds were not active against those strains. Oxacillin-resistant CoNS strains (MIC 90,1 g/ ml) were also very susceptible to LB 11058. In this report we confirmed the potency of LB 11058 against oxacillin-resistant staphylococci, including multidrug-resistant strains (Cho et al., 42nd ICAAC). All strains with reduced susceptibility to glycopeptides (vancomycin-intermediate or -resistant staphylococci), linezolid, and quinupristin-dalfopristin showed an LB 11058 MIC of 1 g/ml, except for one quinupristin-dalfopristin-nonsusceptible CoNS strain which showed an LB 11058 MIC of 2 g/ml. S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae are the most common causes of pyogenic meningitis, community-acquired pneumonia, and otitis media (6). In addition, these pathogens also represent an important cause of nosocomial pneumonia, especially when the onset of the disease occurs within 3 to 5 days after hospital admission (19). Mortality and suppurative complications associated with these infections decrease dramatically with the rapid introduction of appropriate antimicrobial therapy (22). The clinical impact of antimicrobial resistance among these pathogens, especially S. pneumoniae, varies according to the site of infection, reflecting the degree of drug penetration to that site and the ability of the host immune response to clear the infection. Thus, antimicrobial resistance has led to treatment failure in patients with meningitis and acute otitis media. The impact of pneumococcal resistance on treatment of pneumonia has been more difficult to determine, but high-level -lactam or macrolide resistance has been associated with increased morbidity and longer hospital stay (16, 20). LB 11058 showed excellent in vitro activity against pneumococci, including multidrug-resistant strains. LB 11058 (MIC 50, 0.25 g/ml; MIC 90, 0.5 g/ml) was many fold more potent than ceftriaxone (MIC 50,4 g/ml; MIC 90,32 g/ml) against penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae (MIC, 2 g/ml). In addition, LB 11058 was also highly active against H. influenzae, including -lactamase-producing strains (MIC 90, 0.25 g/ml). In summary, our study showed that LB 11058 is very active against many clinically important bacterial pathogens, including streptococci ( -hemolytic, viridans group, and pneumococci), staphylococci (S. aureus and coagulase negative), H. influenzae, and M. catarrhalis among others. LB 11058 in vitro activity against these pathogens was similar to that demonstrated by other new anti-mrsa cephalosporins (2, 9, 12). Moreover, LB 11058 was highly active against multidrug-resistant gram-positive pathogens that may cause both community-

62 SADER ET AL. ANTIMICROB. AGENTS CHEMOTHER. acquired and hospital-acquired infections, especially MRSA and penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae. Continued development of LB 11058 appears justified. REFERENCES 1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2002. Staphylococcus aureus resistant to vancomycin: United States. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 51:565 567. 2. Chamberland, S., J. Blais, M. Hoang, C. Dinh, D. Cotter, E. Bond, C. Gannen, C. Park, F. Malouin, and M. N. Dudley. 2001. In vitro activities of RWJ-54428 (MC-02,479) against multiresistant gram-positive bacteria. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 45:1422 1430. 3. Cormican, M. G., and R. N. Jones. 1996. Emerging resistance to antimicrobial agents in gram-positive bacteria. Enterococci, staphylococci and nonpneumococcal streptococci. Drugs 51(Suppl. 1):6 12. 4. Diekema, D. J., and R. N. Jones. 2001. Oxazolidinone antibiotics. Lancet 358:1975 1982. 5. Diekema, D. J., M. A. Pfaller, F. J Schmitz, J. Smayevsky, J. Bell, R. N. Jones, M. Beach, et al. 2001. Survey of infections due to Staphylococcus species: frequency of occurrence and antimicrobial susceptibility of isolates collected in the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, and the Western Pacific region for the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 1997 1999. Clin. Infect. Dis. 32(Suppl. 2):S114 S132. 6. Dunne, M. W., C. Khurana, A. A. Mohs, A. Rodriguez, A. Arrieta, S. McLinn, J. A. Krogstad, M. Blatter, R. Schwartz, S. L. Vargas, P. Emparanza, P. Fernandez, W. M. Gooch III, M. Aspin, J. Podgore, I. Roine, J. L. Blumer, G. D. Ehrlich, and J. Chow. 2003. Efficacy of single-dose azithromycin in treatment of acute otitis media in children after a baseline tympanocentesis. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 47:2663 2665. 7. Eliopoulos, G. M. 2003. Quinupristin-dalfopristin and linezolid: evidence and opinion. Clin. Infect. Dis. 36:473 481. 8. Frank, A. L., J. F. Marcinak, P. D. Mangat, and P. C. Schreckenberger. 1999. Increase in community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in children. Clin. Infect. Dis. 29:935 936. 9. Fujimura, T., Y. Yamano, I. Yoshida, J. Shimada, and S. Kuwahara. 2003. In vitro activity of S-3578, a new broad-spectrum cephalosporin active against methicillin-resistant staphylococci. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 47:923 931. 10. Hirano, L., and A. S. Bayer. 1991. -Lactam -lactamase-inhibitor combinations are active in experimental endocarditis caused by -lactamase-producing oxacillin-resistant staphylococci. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 35: 685 690. 11. Jones, R. N. 2001. Resistance patterns among nosocomial pathogens. Trends over the past few years. Chest 119(2 Suppl.):397S 404S. 12. Jones, R. N., L. M. Deshpande, A. H. Mutnick, and D. J. Biedenbach. 2002. In vitro evaluation of BAL9141, a novel parenteral cephalosporin active against oxacillin-resistant staphylococci. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 50:915 932. 13. Jones, R. N., P. Della-Latta, L. V. Lee, and D. J. Biedenbach. 2002. Linezolid-resistant Enterococcus faecium isolated from a patient without prior exposure to an oxazolidinone: report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 42:137 139. 14. Jones, T. F., M. E. Kellum, S. S. Porter, M. Bell, and W. Schaffner. 2002. An outbreak of community-acquired foodborne illness caused by methicillinresistant Staphylococcus aureus. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 8:82 84. 15. Livermore, D. M. 2003. Bacterial resistance: origins, epidemiology, and impact. Clin. Infect. Dis. 36(Suppl. 1):S11 S23. 16. Lonks, J. R., J. Garau, L. Gomez, M. Xercavins, A. Ochoa de Echaguen, I. F. Gareen, P. T. Reiss, and A. A. Medeiros. 2002. Failure of macrolide antibiotic treatment in patients with bacteremia due to erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. Clin. Infect. Dis. 35:556 564. 17. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. 2003. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically; approved standard, 6th ed. Approved document M7-A6. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Wayne, Pa. 18. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. 2003. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, 13th informational suppl., M100-S13. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Wayne, Pa. 19. Paradisi, F., G. Corti, and R. Cinelli. 2001. Streptococcus pneumoniae as an agent of nosocomial infection: treatment in the era of penicillin-resistant strains. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 7(Suppl. 4):34 42. 20. Rowland, K. E., and J. D. Turnidge. 2000. The impact of penicillin resistance on the outcome of invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae infection in children. Aust. N. Z. J. Med. 30:441 449. 21. Whitney, C. G., M. M. Farley, J. Hadler, L. H. Harrison, C. Lexau, A. Reingold, L. Lefkowitz, P. R. Cieslak, M. Cetron, E. R. Zell, J. H. Jorgensen, A. Schuchat, et al. 2000. Increasing prevalence of multidrug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 343:1917 1924. 22. Ziglam, H. M., and R. G. Finch. 2002. Penicillin-resistant pneumococci: implications for management of community-acquired pneumonia and meningitis. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 6(Suppl. 1):S14 S20. Downloaded from http://aac.asm.org/ on October 20, 2018 by guest