Skip to main content
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1995 Feb;39(2):533–538. doi: 10.1128/aac.39.2.533

Antibacterial activities of cefprozil compared with those of 13 oral cephems and 3 macrolides.

J C Fung-Tomc 1, E Huczko 1, T Stickle 1, B Minassian 1, B Kolek 1, K Denbleyker 1, D Bonner 1, R Kessler 1
PMCID: PMC162574  PMID: 7726528

Abstract

Thirteen oral cephems (cefprozil, loracarbef, cefaclor, cefuroxime axetil, cefpodoxime proxetil, cefetamet pivoxil, cefixime, cefdinir, cefadroxil, cephradine, cephalexin, cefatrizine, and cefroxadine), the cephalosporin class representative cephalothin, cefazolin, and the macrolides erythromycin, clarithromycin, and azithromycin were compared for their antibacterial activities against 790 recent clinical isolates. These oral agents differed in their spectra and antibacterial potencies against community-acquired pathogens.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (166.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Barry A. L., Jones R. N., Thornsberry C. Reliability of cefaclor, cefazolin, cefamandole, and cephalothin disks to predict susceptibility of Enterobacteriaceae, Staphylococcus species, and Haemophilus influenzae. Am J Clin Pathol. 1985 Nov;84(5):643–648. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/84.5.643. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barry A. L., Thornsberry C., Jones R. N., Fuchs P. C., Gavan T. L., Gerlach E. H. Reassessment of the "class" concept of disk susceptibility testing. Cephalothin disks versus minimal inhibitory concentrations with eleven cephalosporins. Am J Clin Pathol. 1978 Dec;70(6):909–913. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/70.6.909. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Duval J. Evolution and epidemiology of MLS resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1985 Jul;16 (Suppl A):137–149. doi: 10.1093/jac/16.suppl_a.137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fung-Tomc J., Stickle T., Doyle C., Huczko E., Kessler R. E. Inability of cephalothin testing to predict cefprozil susceptibility. J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Nov;29(11):2643–2647. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.11.2643-2647.1991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Geslin P., Buu-Hoi A., Frémaux A., Acar J. F. Antimicrobial resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae: an epidemiological survey in France, 1970-1990. Clin Infect Dis. 1992 Jul;15(1):95–98. doi: 10.1093/clinids/15.1.95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Larsson P., Lincoln K., Lind L., Sandberg T. Variable in vitro activity of cefaclor, cephalothin and cefadroxil against Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus mirabilis. Scand J Infect Dis. 1988;20(4):421–424. doi: 10.3109/00365548809032479. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Leclercq R., Courvalin P. Intrinsic and unusual resistance to macrolide, lincosamide, and streptogramin antibiotics in bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Jul;35(7):1273–1276. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.7.1273. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Liñares J., Pallares R., Alonso T., Perez J. L., Ayats J., Gudiol F., Viladrich P. F., Martin R. Trends in antimicrobial resistance of clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae in Bellvitge Hospital, Barcelona, Spain (1979-1990). Clin Infect Dis. 1992 Jul;15(1):99–105. doi: 10.1093/clinids/15.1.99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Seppälä H., Nissinen A., Yu Q., Huovinen P. Three different phenotypes of erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pyogenes in Finland. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993 Dec;32(6):885–891. doi: 10.1093/jac/32.6.885. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Soriano F., Fernández-Roblas R. High rates of erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae among penicillin-resistant strains. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993 Mar;31(3):440–440. doi: 10.1093/jac/31.3.440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES