Skip to main content
PMC home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1993 Mar;37(3):605–609. doi: 10.1128/aac.37.3.605

Teicoplanin and daptomycin bactericidal activities in the presence of albumin or serum under controlled conditions of pH and ionized calcium.

K C Lamp 1, M J Rybak 1
PMCID: PMC187715  PMID: 8384822

Abstract

Teicoplanin and daptomycin bactericidal rates (BRs) were measured from standard kill curves in supplemented Mueller-Hinton broth (B), B with 3 g of albumin per dl (BA), B with 50% pooled human serum (BS), and in broth to simulate free concentrations (BF) under controlled physiologic conditions of pH (7.4) and ionized calcium (1.15 to 1.17 mM) against two clinical Staphylococcus aureus strains. Total concentrations of teicoplanin and daptomycin, respectively, were 45 and 12.5 micrograms/ml in B, BA, and BS and 4.5 and 1.25 micrograms/ml in BF. All BRs are reported as log10 CFU per milliliter per hour. There was a trend for the teicoplanin BR to be inhibited by serum for strain 67 (BR in B was -0.26 +/- 0.08 versus a BR in BS of -0.19 +/- 0.08 [P > 0.05]). The teicoplanin BRs for strain 135 were unaffected by the type of medium used (range, -0.17 to -0.20). For both strains, daptomycin BRs were adversely affected by lower concentrations, albumin, and serum. The BR of daptomycin was significantly faster in B (-4.53 +/- 1.92) (P < 0.05) than it was in BF (-0.58 +/- 0.04), BA (-1.68 +/- 0.28), or BS (-1.02 +/- 0.16) against strain 67. BA and BS resulted in BRs more than twice that in BF (P > 0.05). Against strain 135, daptomycin again produced the highest BR in B; however, the BRs in BF, BA, and BS were almost identical, indicating that only free daptomycin was active. After correcting for the influence of protein binding, pH, and ionized calcium, teicoplanin appeared to be inhibited by serum, and daptomycin demonstrated enhanced BRs against different S. aureus strains in the presence of albumin or serum.

Full text

PDF
608

Selected References

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

  1. Alborn W. E., Jr, Allen N. E., Preston D. A. Daptomycin disrupts membrane potential in growing Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Nov;35(11):2282–2287. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.11.2282. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen N. E., Alborn W. E., Jr, Hobbs J. N., Jr Inhibition of membrane potential-dependent amino acid transport by daptomycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Dec;35(12):2639–2642. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.12.2639. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailey E. M., Rybak M. J., Kaatz G. W. Comparative effect of protein binding on the killing activities of teicoplanin and vancomycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Jun;35(6):1089–1092. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.6.1089. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chambers H. F., Kennedy S. Effects of dosage, peak and trough concentrations in serum, protein binding, and bactericidal rate on efficacy of teicoplanin in a rabbit model of endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Apr;34(4):510–514. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.4.510. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Darveau R. P., Cunningham M. D. Influence of subinhibitory concentrations of cephalosporins on the serum sensitivity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Infect Dis. 1990 Oct;162(4):914–921. doi: 10.1093/infdis/162.4.914. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Eliopoulos G. M., Willey S., Reiszner E., Spitzer P. G., Caputo G., Moellering R. C., Jr In vitro and in vivo activity of LY 146032, a new cyclic lipopeptide antibiotic. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986 Oct;30(4):532–535. doi: 10.1128/aac.30.4.532. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Garrison M. W., Vance-Bryan K., Larson T. A., Toscano J. P., Rotschafer J. C. Assessment of effects of protein binding on daptomycin and vancomycin killing of Staphylococcus aureus by using an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Oct;34(10):1925–1931. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.10.1925. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Gold M. J., Calmon J., Wendeler M., Levison M. E., Johnson C. C. Synergistic bactericidal activity of rat serum with vancomycin against enterococci. J Infect Dis. 1991 Jun;163(6):1358–1361. doi: 10.1093/infdis/163.6.1358. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hanberger H., Nilsson L. E., Maller R., Isaksson B. Pharmacodynamics of daptomycin and vancomycin on Enterococcus faecalis and Staphylococcus aureus demonstrated by studies of initial killing and postantibiotic effect and influence of Ca2+ and albumin on these drugs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Sep;35(9):1710–1716. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.9.1710. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Jones R. N., Barry A. L. Antimicrobial activity and spectrum of LY146032, a lipopeptide antibiotic, including susceptibility testing recommendations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1987 Apr;31(4):625–629. doi: 10.1128/aac.31.4.625. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kaatz G. W., Seo S. M., Reddy V. N., Bailey E. M., Rybak M. J. Daptomycin compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin for therapy of experimental Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Nov;34(11):2081–2085. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.11.2081. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lee B. L., Sachdeva M., Chambers H. F. Effect of protein binding of daptomycin on MIC and antibacterial activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Dec;35(12):2505–2508. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.12.2505. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lentino J. R., Strodthman R. Comparison of in vitro activity of daptomycin, vancomycin and fluoroquinolones in broth and serum against Staphylococcus epidermidis as determined by time-kill kinetics. Chemotherapy. 1989;35(3):168–173. doi: 10.1159/000238666. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Low D. E., McGeer A., Poon R. Activities of daptomycin and teicoplanin against Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis, including evaluation of susceptibility testing recommendations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Apr;33(4):585–588. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.4.585. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Mouton R. P., Mulders S. L. LY146032: activity and resistance development in vitro. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987 Oct;20(4):513–517. doi: 10.1093/jac/20.4.513. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Reller L. B., Stratton C. W. Serum dilution test for bactericidal activity. II. Standardization and correlation with antimicrobial assays and susceptibility tests. J Infect Dis. 1977 Aug;136(2):196–204. doi: 10.1093/infdis/136.2.196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Rotschafer J. C., Garrison M. W., Rodvold K. A. Therapeutic update on glycopeptide and lipopeptide antibiotics. Pharmacotherapy. 1988;8(4):211–219. doi: 10.1002/j.1875-9114.1988.tb04076.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Rybak M. J., Bailey E. M., Lamp K. C., Kaatz G. W. Pharmacokinetics and bactericidal rates of daptomycin and vancomycin in intravenous drug abusers being treated for gram-positive endocarditis and bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 May;36(5):1109–1114. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.5.1109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Rybak M. J., Bailey E. M., Reddy V. N. Clinical evaluation of teicoplanin fluorescence polarization immunoassay. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Aug;35(8):1586–1590. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.8.1586. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Stratton C. W., Weeks L. S. Effect of human serum on the bactericidal activity of daptomycin and vancomycin against staphylococcal and enterococcal isolates as determined by time-kill kinetic studies. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1990 May-Jun;13(3):245–252. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(90)90067-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Tripodi M. F., Adinolfi L. E., Utili R., Marrone A., Ruggiero G. Influence of subinhibitory concentrations of loracarbef (LY 163892) and daptomycin (LY 146032) on bacterial phagocytosis, killing and serum sensitivity. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1990 Oct;26(4):491–501. doi: 10.1093/jac/26.4.491. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Woodworth J. R., Nyhart E. H., Jr, Brier G. L., Wolny J. D., Black H. R. Single-dose pharmacokinetics and antibacterial activity of daptomycin, a new lipopeptide antibiotic, in healthy volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 Feb;36(2):318–325. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.2.318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. de la Maza L., Ruoff K. L., Ferraro M. J. In vitro activities of daptomycin and other antimicrobial agents against vancomycin-resistant gram-positive bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Aug;33(8):1383–1384. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.8.1383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES