Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 1992 Apr;36(4):851–853. doi: 10.1128/aac.36.4.851

In vitro antistaphylococcal activities of two investigative fluoroquinolones, CI-960 and WIN 57273, compared with those of ciprofloxacin, mupirocin (pseudomonic acid), and peptide-class antimicrobial agents.

K E Aldridge 1
PMCID: PMC189454  PMID: 1323955

Abstract

By using broth microdilution, 373 clinical isolates of staphylococci were studied to determine their susceptibilities to CI-960, WIN 57273, ciprofloxacin, mupirocin, vancomycin, teicoplanin, and ramoplanin. Test strains comprised 179 strains of Staphylococcus aureus and 194 strains of coagulase-negative species. Strains of S. aureus were susceptible to CI-960, which had a mode MIC of 0.032 micrograms/ml and an MIC for 90% of the strains of 2 micrograms/ml. CI-960 was equally active against methicillin-susceptible and -resistant S. aureus strains as well as ciprofloxacin-resistant strains. Similarly, WIN 57273 was highly active, with a mode MIC of 0.008 micrograms/ml and an MIC for 90% of the strains of 1 micrograms/ml. No cross-resistance to CI-960 and WIN 57273 among ciprofloxacin-resistant strains was detected. Mupirocin was four- to eightfold more active than ramoplanin, vancomycin, and teicoplanin. With regard to coagulase-negative staphylococci, CI-960 and WIN 57273 were the most active of the test compounds, inhibiting all strains at 0.5 and 1 micrograms/ml, respectively. Against the same strains, mupirocin was fourfold more active than ramoplanin and eightfold more active than vancomycin. Five strains of S. haemolyticus were found to be resistant to ciprofloxacin, while resistance to teicoplanin was found among strains of S. epidermidis, S. haemolyticus, S. hominis, S. saprophyticus, S. simulans, S. warneri, and S. xylosus.

Full text

PDF
851

Selected References

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

  1. Barry A. L., Fuchs P. C. Antistaphylococcal activity of the fluoroquinolones CI-960, PD 131628, sparfloxacin, ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1991 Mar;10(3):168–171. doi: 10.1007/BF01964451. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Brumfitt W., Hamilton-Miller J. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. N Engl J Med. 1989 May 4;320(18):1188–1196. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198905043201806. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Forstall G. J., Knapp C. C., Washington J. A. Activity of new quinolones against ciprofloxacin-resistant staphylococci. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1991 Aug;35(8):1679–1681. doi: 10.1128/aac.35.8.1679. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. 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]
  5. Maple P. A., Hamilton-Miller J. M., Brumfitt W. World-wide antibiotic resistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Lancet. 1989 Mar 11;1(8637):537–540. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(89)90076-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. O'Hare M. D., Felmingham D., Grüneberg R. N. The in vitro activity of ramoplanin (A-16686/MDL 62,198), vancomycin and teicoplanin against methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp. Drugs Exp Clin Res. 1988;14(10):617–619. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Piercy E. A., Barbaro D., Luby J. P., Mackowiak P. A. Ciprofloxacin for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Jan;33(1):128–130. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.1.128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Raviglione M. C., Boyle J. F., Mariuz P., Pablos-Mendez A., Cortes H., Merlo A. Ciprofloxacin-resistant methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an acute-care hospital. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Nov;34(11):2050–2054. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.11.2050. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Schaefler S. Methicillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus resistant to quinolones. J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Feb;27(2):335–336. doi: 10.1128/jcm.27.2.335-336.1989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Schwalbe R. S., Stapleton J. T., Gilligan P. H. Emergence of vancomycin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci. N Engl J Med. 1987 Apr 9;316(15):927–931. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198704093161507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Sedlock D. M., Dobson R. A., Deuel D. M., Lesher G. Y., Rake J. B. In vitro and in vivo activities of a new quinolone, WIN 57273, possessing potent activity against gram-positive bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990 Apr;34(4):568–575. doi: 10.1128/aac.34.4.568. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Shalit I., Berger S. A., Gorea A., Frimerman H. Widespread quinolone resistance among methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates in a general hospital. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Apr;33(4):593–594. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.4.593. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Smith S. M., Eng R. H., Tecson-Tumang F. Ciprofloxacin therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections or colonizations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1989 Feb;33(2):181–184. doi: 10.1128/aac.33.2.181. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES