Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1994 Jun;38(6):1442–1445. doi: 10.1128/aac.38.6.1442

Comparative activities of eight quinolones against members of the Bacteroides fragilis group.

M V Borobio 1, M Conejo 1, E Ramirez 1, A I Suarez 1, E J Perea 1
PMCID: PMC188229  PMID: 8092852

Abstract

The in vitro activities of five new quinolones (clinafloxacin [CI-960 or PD-127391], BAY Y 3118, E-4868, E-5065, and E-5068) against 100 Bacteroides fragilis group bacterial isolates were compared with those of ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin, and sparfloxacin. Overall, E-5068 was the most active in vitro (MIC for 90% of isolates tested [MIC90], 0.25 microgram/ml); this was followed by clinafloxacin and BAY Y 3118 (MIC90, 0.5 microgram/ml). Ciprofloxacin, sparfloxacin, and ofloxacin were the least active (MIC90s, 64, 16, and 16 micrograms/ml, respectively). B. fragilis and Bacteroides caccae were more susceptible than the other members of the B. fragilis group to all of the quinolones tested.

Full text

PDF
1442

Selected References

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

  1. Appelbaum P. C., Spangler S. K., Jacobs M. R. Susceptibilities of 394 Bacteroides fragilis, non-B. fragilis group Bacteroides species, and Fusobacterium species to newer antimicrobial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Jun;35(6):1214–1218. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.6.1214. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barrett M. S., Jones R. N., Erwin M. E. In vitro activity of E-4868, a new trifluoroquinolone, compared to six similar compounds. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1993 Feb;12(2):134–141. doi: 10.1007/BF01967592. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barry A. L., Fuchs P. C., Citron D. M., Allen S. D., Wexler H. M. Methods for testing the susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria to two fluoroquinolone compounds, PD 131628 and clinafloxacin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993 Jun;31(6):893–900. doi: 10.1093/jac/31.6.893. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Barry A. L., Fuchs P. C. In vitro activities of sparfloxacin, tosufloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and fleroxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 May;35(5):955–960. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.5.955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bauernfeind A. Comparative in-vitro activities of the new quinolone, Bay y 3118, and ciprofloxacin, sparfloxacin, tosufloxacin, CI-960 and CI-990. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1993 Apr;31(4):505–522. doi: 10.1093/jac/31.4.505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Borobio M. V., Perea E. J. Effect of inoculum, pH, and medium on the activity of ciprofloxacin against anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984 Mar;25(3):342–343. doi: 10.1128/aac.25.3.342. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bourgault A. M., Lamothe F., Hoban D. J., Dalton M. T., Kibsey P. C., Harding G., Smith J. A., Low D. E., Gilbert H. Survey of Bacteroides fragilis group susceptibility patterns in Canada. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 Feb;36(2):343–347. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.2.343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fuchs P. C., Barry A. L., Pfaller M. A., Allen S. D., Gerlach E. H. Multicenter evaluation of the in vitro activities of three new quinolones, sparfloxacin, CI-960, and PD 131,628, compared with the activity of ciprofloxacin against 5,252 clinical bacterial isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Apr;35(4):764–766. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.4.764. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. García-Rodríguez J. E., García-Sánchez J. E. Evolution of antimicrobial susceptibility in isolates of the Bacteroides fragilis group in Spain. Rev Infect Dis. 1990 Jan-Feb;12 (Suppl 2):S142–S151. doi: 10.1093/clinids/12.supplement_2.s142. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gargallo-Viola D., Esteve M., Moros M., Coll R., Xicota M. A., de Andres C., Roser R., Guinea J. Comparative in vitro and in vivo activities of six new monofluoroquinolone and difluoroquinolone 3-carboxylic acids with a 7-azetidin ring substituent. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Dec;34(12):2318–2326. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.12.2318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Goldstein E. J., Citron D. M. Comparative activity of ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin, sparfloxacin, temafloxacin, CI-960, CI-990, and WIN 57273 against anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992 May;36(5):1158–1162. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.5.1158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Goldstein E. J., Citron D. M. Comparative activity of the quinolones against anaerobic bacteria isolated at community hospitals. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1985 Apr;27(4):657–659. doi: 10.1128/aac.27.4.657. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Ito A., Hirai K., Inoue M., Koga H., Suzue S., Irikura T., Mitsuhashi S. In vitro antibacterial activity of AM-715, a new nalidixic acid analog. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1980 Feb;17(2):103–108. doi: 10.1128/aac.17.2.103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. King A., Boothman C., Phillips I. The in-vitro activity of PD127,391, a new quinolone. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1988 Aug;22(2):135–141. doi: 10.1093/jac/22.2.135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Nord C. E., Lindmark A., Persson I. In vitro activity of the new quinolone BAY y 3118 against anaerobic bacteria. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1993 Aug;12(8):640–642. doi: 10.1007/BF01973648. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Walker R. C., Wright A. J. Symposium on antimicrobial agents. The quinolones. Mayo Clin Proc. 1987 Nov;62(11):1007–1012. doi: 10.1016/s0025-6196(12)65073-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES