Skip to main content
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1988 May;32(5):752–754. doi: 10.1128/aac.32.5.752

In vitro activities of azithromycin (CP 62,993), clarithromycin (A-56268; TE-031), erythromycin, roxithromycin, and clindamycin.

A L Barry 1, R N Jones 1, C Thornsberry 1
PMCID: PMC172265  PMID: 2840016

Abstract

The in vitro activity of azithromycin (CP 62,993 or XZ-450) against Haemophilus influenzae was greater than that of three other macrolides. However, azithromycin was four- to eightfold less active than erythromycin against the gram-positive cocci and against Listeria monocytogenes. Erythromycin and azithromycin were similar in their activity against Legionella pneumophila, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Neisseria meningitidis, and Branhamella catarrhalis.

Full text

PDF
752

Selected References

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

  1. Aronoff S. C., Laurent C., Jacobs M. R. In-vitro activity of erythromycin, roxithromycin and CP 62993 against common paediatric pathogens. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987 Feb;19(2):275–276. doi: 10.1093/jac/19.2.275. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barry A. L., Jones R. N., Thornsberry C. Disk diffusion and disk elution tests with A-56268 and erythromycin. Eur J Clin Microbiol. 1987 Feb;6(1):109–111. doi: 10.1007/BF02097213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barry A. L., Thornsberry C., Jones R. N. In vitro activity of a new macrolide, A-56268, compared with that of roxithromycin, erythromycin, and clindamycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Feb;31(2):343–345. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.2.343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fernandes P. B., Bailer R., Swanson R., Hanson C. W., McDonald E., Ramer N., Hardy D., Shipkowitz N., Bower R. R., Gade E. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of A-56268 (TE-031), a new macrolide. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986 Dec;30(6):865–873. doi: 10.1128/aac.30.6.865. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Jones R. N., Barry A. L. The antimicrobial activity of A-56268 (TE-031) and roxithromycin (RU965) against Legionella using broth microdilution method. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987 Jun;19(6):841–842. doi: 10.1093/jac/19.6.841. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Jones R. N., Barry A. L., Thornsberry C. In vitro evaluation of three new macrolide antimicrobial agents, RU28965, RU29065, and RU29702, and comparisons with other orally administered drugs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1983 Aug;24(2):209–215. doi: 10.1128/aac.24.2.209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Rosenblatt J. E., Schoenknecht F. Effect of several components of anaerobic incubation on antibiotic susceptibility test results. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1972 May;1(5):433–440. doi: 10.1128/aac.1.5.433. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Washington J. A., 2nd, Wilson W. R. Erythromycin: a microbial and clinical perspective after 30 years of clinical use (1). Mayo Clin Proc. 1985 Mar;60(3):189–203. doi: 10.1016/s0025-6196(12)60219-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES