The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Use of Preclinical Data for Selection of a Phase II/III Dose for Evernimicin and Identification of a Preclinical MIC Breakpoint
Open accessAbstract
One of the most challenging issues in the design of phase II/III clinical trials of antimicrobial agents is dose selection. The choice is often based on preclinical data from pharmacokinetic (PK) studies with animals and healthy volunteers but is rarely linked directly to the target organisms except by the MIC, an in vitro measure of antimicrobial activity with many limitations. It is the thesis of this paper that rational dose-selection decisions can be made on the basis of the pharmacodynamics (PDs) of the test agent predicted by a mathematical model which uses four data sets: (i) the distribution of MICs for clinical isolates, (ii) the distribution of the values of the PK parameters for the test drug in the population, (iii) the PD target(s) developed from animal models of infection, and (iv) the protein binding characteristics of the test drug. In performing this study with the new anti-infective agent evernimicin, we collected a large number ( n = 4,543) of recent clinical isolates of gram-positive pathogens ( Streptococcus pneumoniae , Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium , and Staphylococcus aureus ) and determined the MICs using E-test methods (AB Biodisk, Stockholm, Sweden) for susceptibility to evernimicin. Population PK data were collected from healthy volunteers ( n = 40) and patients with hypoalbuminemia ( n = 12), and the data were analyzed by using NPEM III. PD targets were developed with a neutropenic murine thigh infection model with three target pathogens: S. pneumoniae ( n = 5), E. faecalis ( n = 2), and S. aureus ( n = 4). Drug exposure or the ratio of the area under the concentration-time curve/MIC (AUC/MIC) was found to be the best predictor of microbiological efficacy. There were three possible microbiological results: stasis of the initial inoculum at 24 h (10 7 CFU), log killing (pathogen dependent, ranging from 1 to 3 log 10 ), or 90% maximal killing effect (90% E max ). The levels of protein binding in humans and mice were similar. The PK and PD of 6 and 9 mg of evernimicin per kg of body weight were compared; the population values for the model parameters and population covariance matrix were used to generate five Monte Carlo simulations with 200 subjects each. The fractional probability of attaining the three PD targets was calculated for each dose and for each of the three pathogens. All differences in the fractional probability of attaining the target AUC/MIC in this PD model were significant. For S. pneumoniae , the probability of attaining all three PD targets was high for both doses. For S. aureus and enterococci, there were increasing differences between the 6- and 9-mg/kg evernimicin doses for reaching the 2 log killing ( S. aureus ), 1 log killing (enterococci), or 90% E max AUC/MIC targets. This same approach may also be used to set preliminary in vitro MIC breakpoints.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Optimizing Aminoglycoside Therapy for Nosocomial Pneumonia Caused by Gram-Negative Bacteria
Kashuba, A. D. M., Nafziger, A. N., Drusano, G. L., & Bertino, J. S. (1999) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.43.3.623 · Cited by 380 · cited 1×
“sides, beta-lactams, and antiviral agents (4, 5, 11, 14).”
Self-citation
Cited by
Antimicrobial pharmacodynamics: critical interactions of 'bug and drug'
Drusano, G. L. (2004) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro862 · Cited by 930
Self-citationSetting and Revising Antibacterial Susceptibility Breakpoints
Turnidge, J., & Paterson, D. L. (2007) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00047-06 · Cited by 578
Mouton, J. W., Dudley, M. N., Cars, O., Derendorf, H., & Drusano, G. L. (2005) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dki079 · Cited by 549
Self-citationLodise, T. P., Lomaestro, B., & Drusano, G. L. (2007) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/510590 · Cited by 527
Self-citationPharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Antibacterial Drugs
Nielsen, E. I., & Friberg, L. E. (2013) · Pharmacological Reviews · doi:10.1124/pr.111.005769 · Cited by 332
Metadata
- Authors
- Drusano, G. L., Preston, S. L., Hardalo, C., Hare, R., Banfield, C., Andes, D., Vesga, O., & Craig, W. A.
- Venue
- Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2001-01
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 13-22
- ISSN
- 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-6596
- OpenAlex
- W2158568849
- Cited by
- 243
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Use of Preclinical Data for Selection of a Phase II/III Dose for Evernimicin and Identification of a Preclinical MIC Breakpoint. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.45.1.13-22.2001
- The paper
- Drusano, G. L., Preston, S. L., Hardalo, C., Hare, R., Banfield, C., Andes, D., Vesga, O., & Craig, W. A. (2001). Use of Preclinical Data for Selection of a Phase II/III Dose for Evernimicin and Identification of a Preclinical MIC Breakpoint. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.45.1.13-22.2001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.