Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDijkstra, J A
dc.contributor.authorvan der Laan, T
dc.contributor.authorAkkerman, O W
dc.contributor.authorBolhuis, M S
dc.contributor.authorde Lange, W C M
dc.contributor.authorKosterink, J G W
dc.contributor.authorvan der Werf, T S
dc.contributor.authorAlffenaar, J W C
dc.contributor.authorvan Soolingen, D
dc.date.accessioned2018-01-16T09:38:36Z
dc.date.available2018-01-16T09:38:36Z
dc.date.issued2018-01-08
dc.identifier.citationIn vitro drug susceptibility of Mycobacterium tuberculosis for amikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin. 2018 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.en
dc.identifier.issn1098-6596
dc.identifier.pmid29311078
dc.identifier.doi10.1128/AAC.01724-17
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10029/621168
dc.description.abstractAmikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin are listed among the most important 2nd line drugs for multidrug resistant tuberculosis. Although amikacin and kanamycin are administered in the same dose and show the same pharmacokinetics, they have different WHO breakpoints suggesting that the two drugs have a different minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC). The aim of this paper was to investigate possible differences in MIC between the aminoglycosides and capreomycin.Using the direct concentration method, a concentration range of amikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin (0.25, 0.50, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, 8.0, 16.0, 32.0 and 64.0 mg/L) was tested against 57 clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains. The 7H10 agar plates were examined for mycobacterial growth after 14 days.At 2 mg/L, 48 strains (84%) were inhibited by amikacin and only five strains (9%) were inhibited by kanamycin (p < 0.05, Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test). The median MICs of amikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin were 2, 4 and 8 mg/L, respectively. No difference was observed between multidrug resistant and fully susceptible strains in the MIC-distribution of amikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin.The results indicate that amikacin is more active against M. tuberculosis than kanamycin and capreomycin in the absolute concentration method. The impact of this difference on clinical outcome in daily practice requires a prospective study including pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics evaluations.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen
dc.titleIn vitro drug susceptibility of Mycobacterium tuberculosis for amikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.journalAntimicrob Agents Chemother 2018; 62(3):e01724-17en
html.description.abstractAmikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin are listed among the most important 2nd line drugs for multidrug resistant tuberculosis. Although amikacin and kanamycin are administered in the same dose and show the same pharmacokinetics, they have different WHO breakpoints suggesting that the two drugs have a different minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC). The aim of this paper was to investigate possible differences in MIC between the aminoglycosides and capreomycin.Using the direct concentration method, a concentration range of amikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin (0.25, 0.50, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, 8.0, 16.0, 32.0 and 64.0 mg/L) was tested against 57 clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains. The 7H10 agar plates were examined for mycobacterial growth after 14 days.At 2 mg/L, 48 strains (84%) were inhibited by amikacin and only five strains (9%) were inhibited by kanamycin (p < 0.05, Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test). The median MICs of amikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin were 2, 4 and 8 mg/L, respectively. No difference was observed between multidrug resistant and fully susceptible strains in the MIC-distribution of amikacin, kanamycin and capreomycin.The results indicate that amikacin is more active against M. tuberculosis than kanamycin and capreomycin in the absolute concentration method. The impact of this difference on clinical outcome in daily practice requires a prospective study including pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics evaluations.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record