Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1987 Aug;31(8):1188–1193. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.8.1188

Comparative in vitro activity of CGP 31608, a new penem antibiotic.

G M Eliopoulos, C Wennersten, E Reiszner, R C Moellering Jr
PMCID: PMC174901  PMID: 3498437

Abstract

The in vitro activity of a new penem antimicrobial agent, CGP 31608, was compared with those of imipenem, SCH 34343, and several other antimicrobial agents against approximately 600 bacterial isolates. CGP 31608 was active against gram-positive organisms, including methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MIC for 90% of the isolates [MIC90], 0.25 microgram/ml) and penicillin-susceptible streptococci (MIC90s, less than or equal to 2 micrograms/ml). Penicillin-resistant streptococci (including enterococci) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus were more resistant to the penem. Activities of CGP 31608 against members of the family Enterobacteriaceae were remarkably uniform, with MIC90s of 8 to 16 micrograms/ml. CGP 31608 was at least as active as imipenem and ceftazidime and more active than piperacillin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Drug activity was not influenced by the presence of any of 10 plasmid-mediated beta-lactamases. Against strains of Serratia marcescens, Enterobacter cloacae, and P. aeruginosa with derepressible chromosomally mediated beta-lactamases, the presence of cefoxitin did not induce increased resistance to CGP 31608. The new drug was also active against anaerobes (MIC90s, 0.25 to 8 micrograms/ml), Haemophilus influenzae (MIC90s, 0.5 to 1.0 micrograms/ml), and Legionella spp. (MIC90, 2 micrograms/ml). CGP 31608 showed an antibacterial spectrum similar to those of imipenem and SCH 34343 (except that the latter is not active against P. aeruginosa) but was generally less potent than these drugs. However, CGP 31608 demonstrated more activity (MIC90) than imipenem against P. aeruginosa, Pseudomonas cepacia, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis and S. aureus.

Full text

PDF
1188

Selected References

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

  1. Beasley C. R., Humble M. W., O'Donnell T. V. Treatment of pneumonia with imipenem/cilastatin. N Z Med J. 1985 Jun 26;98(781):494–497. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Calderwood S. B., Gardella A., Philippon A. M., Jacoby G. A., Moellering R. C., Jr Effects of azlocillin in combination with clavulanic acid, sulbactam, and N-formimidoyl thienamycin against beta-lactamase-producing, carbenicillin-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1982 Aug;22(2):266–271. doi: 10.1128/aac.22.2.266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Eliopoulos G. M., Gardella A., Moellering R. C., Jr In-vitro activity of Sch 29482 in comparison with other oral antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1982 Feb;9 (Suppl 100):143–152. doi: 10.1093/jac/9.suppl_c.143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fan W., del Busto R., Love M., Markowitz N., Cendrowski C., Cardenas J., Quinn E., Saravolatz L. Imipenem-cilastatin in the treatment of methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986 Jan;29(1):26–29. doi: 10.1128/aac.29.1.26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fitzgeorge R. B., Gibson D. H., Jepras R. I., Baskerville A. Efficacy of imipenem in experimental Legionnaires' disease. Lancet. 1985 Mar 16;1(8429):633–634. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(85)92164-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Neu H. C., Chin N. X., Neu N. M. In vitro activity and beta-lactamase stability of a new penem, CGP 31608. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Apr;31(4):558–569. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.4.558. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Saino Y., Kobayashi F., Inoue M., Mitsuhashi S. Purification and properties of inducible penicillin beta-lactamase isolated from Pseudomonas maltophilia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1982 Oct;22(4):564–570. doi: 10.1128/aac.22.4.564. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Saito A., Sawatari K., Fukuda Y., Nagasawa M., Koga H., Tomonaga A., Nakazato H., Fujita K., Shigeno Y., Suzuyama Y. Susceptibility of Legionella pneumophila to ofloxacin in vitro and in experimental Legionella pneumonia in guinea pigs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1985 Jul;28(1):15–20. doi: 10.1128/aac.28.1.15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Shannon K., King A., Phillips I. Sch 34343: in-vitro antibacterial activity and susceptibility to beta-lactamases. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1985 Jun;15 (Suppl 100):15–23. doi: 10.1093/jac/15.suppl_c.15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Sutter V. L., Kwok Y. Y., Bulkacz J. Comparative activity of ciprofloxacin against anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1985 Mar;27(3):427–428. doi: 10.1128/aac.27.3.427. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Wise R., Andrews J. M., Piddock L. J. In vitro activity of CGP 31608, a new penem. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Feb;31(2):267–273. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.2.267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES