White R, Friedrich L, Burgess D, Warkentin D, Bosso J
College of Pharmacy, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston 29425-0810, USA.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996 Apr;40(4):904-8. doi: 10.1128/AAC.40.4.904.
MICs are commonly used to assess the in vitro activities of antimicrobial agents; however, they provide minimal information on the pattern of bacterial activities. Time-kill studies with extensive sampling allow assessment of both the rate and extent of bacterial killing and regrowth. We compared imipenem and meropenem by both MIC-MBC testing and a time-kill study with P. aeruginosa 27853. In the time-kill study, concentration/MIC ratios ranging from 0.0625 to 32 times the MIC were studied. The kill rate, time to 99.9% kill, doubling time of regrowth, and area under the bacterial killing curve (AUKC) were evaluated. Degradation during the testing procedure was accounted for by assessing actual drug exposure as determined by the area under the concentration-time curve. Pharmacodynamic parameters were compared by using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The modal MIC and MBC for imipenem were 2 and 4 micrograms/ml, respectively, and those for meropenem were 0.25 and 0.5 microgram/ml, respectively. In the time-kill study, both agents displayed concentration-dependent activity over a range of 0.25 to 4 times the MIC. Initial killing (0 to 1 h) was faster with imipenem at the same concentration/MIC ratios (P = 0.0506). The time to 99.9% kill was approximately 5 h for both agents. When regrowth occurred, the doubling rate for imipenem, which was the same as that for the growth control, was twice as rapid as that for meropenem. At the same concentrations, the AUKCs over 24 h were lower for meropenem than for imipenem (P = 0.0280); however, when normalized by MIC, imipenem resulted in smaller AUKCs. Comparison of plots of area under the concentration-time curve versus AUKC, which accounted for drug degradation and actual drug exposure, revealed that meropenem was three times more active than imipenem, rather than the eightfold difference suggested by MICs. Time-kill curves with extensive sampling and measurement of actual drug exposure, rather than traditional MIC testing, may more accurately assess differences in the in vitro activities of antimicrobial agents.
最低抑菌浓度(MIC)常用于评估抗菌药物的体外活性;然而,它们提供的关于细菌活性模式的信息极少。进行广泛采样的时间-杀菌研究能够评估细菌杀灭和再生长的速率及程度。我们通过MIC-MBC测试以及对铜绿假单胞菌27853进行时间-杀菌研究,比较了亚胺培南和美罗培南。在时间-杀菌研究中,研究了浓度/MIC比值范围为MIC的0.0625至32倍的情况。评估了杀灭速率、达到99.9%杀灭所需时间、再生长的倍增时间以及细菌杀灭曲线下面积(AUKC)。通过评估浓度-时间曲线下面积所确定的实际药物暴露来解释测试过程中的降解情况。使用Wilcoxon符号秩检验比较药效学参数。亚胺培南的模态MIC和MBC分别为2和4微克/毫升,美罗培南的分别为0.25和0.5微克/毫升。在时间-杀菌研究中,两种药物在MIC的0.25至4倍范围内均表现出浓度依赖性活性。在相同浓度/MIC比值下,亚胺培南的初始杀灭(0至1小时)更快(P = 0.0506)。两种药物达到99.9%杀灭所需时间约为5小时。当出现再生长时,亚胺培南的倍增速率与生长对照相同,是美罗培南的两倍。在相同浓度下,美罗培南24小时的AUKC低于亚胺培南(P = 0.0280);然而,按MIC进行标准化时,亚胺培南的AUKC更小。比较考虑药物降解和实际药物暴露的浓度-时间曲线下面积与AUKC的图,结果显示美罗培南的活性比亚胺培南高三倍,而非MIC所显示的八倍差异。进行广泛采样和测量实际药物暴露的时间-杀菌曲线,而非传统MIC测试,可能更准确地评估抗菌药物体外活性的差异。