Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 278

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

In Vivo Pharmacodynamics of a New Oxazolidinone (Linezolid)

Open access
Andes, D., van Ogtrop, M. L., Peng, J., Craig, W. A.·2002·Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Abstract

Linezolid is a new oxazolidinone with activity against gram-positive cocci. We determined the in vivo activity of linezolid against four strains of Staphylococcus aureus (two methicillin-susceptible S. aureus [MSSA] strains and two methicillin-resistant S. aureus strains) and one penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae (PSSP) strain, two penicillin-intermediate S. pneumoniae strains, and five penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae strains. The mice had 10 6.3 to 10 7.7 CFU/thigh before therapy and were then treated for 24 h with 5 to 1,280 mg of linezolid/kg divided into 1, 2, 4, 8, or 16 doses. The killing activities after 4 h of therapy ranged from 2.4 to 5.0 log 10 CFU/thigh against S. pneumoniae and 1.35 to 2.2 log 10 CFU/thigh against S. aureus . Increasing doses produced minimal concentration-dependent killing; doses of 20 and 80 mg/kg produced no in vivo postantibiotic effects (PAEs) with PSSP and modest PAEs (3.4 and 3.2 h) with MSSA. Pharmacokinetic studies at doses of 20 and 80 mg/kg by high-pressure liquid chromatography analysis exhibited peak dose values of 0.68 and 0.71 and elimination half-lives of 1.02 and 1.00 h. Linezolid MICs ranged from 0.5 to 1.0 μg/ml for S. pneumoniae and from 1.0 to 4.0 μg/ml for S. aureus . A sigmoid dose-response model was used to estimate the dose required to achieve a net bacteriostatic effect over 24 h. Static doses against S. pneumoniae ranged from 22.2 to 97.1 mg/kg/24 h and from 133 to 167 mg/kg/24 h for S. aureus . The 24-h area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)/MIC ratio was the major parameter determining the efficacy of linezolid against PSSP ( R 2 = 82% for AUC/MIC versus 57% for T>MIC and 59% for the peak level in serum/MIC [peak/MIC]). It was difficult to determine the most relevant pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameter with S. aureus , although the outcomes correlated slightly better with the 24-h AUC/MIC ratio ( R 2 = 75%) than with the other parameters (T>MIC R 2 = 75% and peak/MIC R 2 = 65%). The 24-h AUC/MIC ratio required for a bacteriostatic effect with linezolid varied from 22 to 97 (mean = 48) for pneumococci and from 39 to 167 (mean = 83) for staphylococci. Based upon a pharmacokinetic goal of a 24-h AUC/MIC of 50 to 100, a dosage regimen of 600 mg given either intravenously or orally twice daily would achieve success against organisms with MICs as high as 2 to 4 μg/ml.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aac.46.11.3484-3489.2002

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 278

Metadata

Authors
Andes, D., van Ogtrop, M. L., Peng, J., & Craig, W. A.
Venue
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Published
2002-11
Volume
46
Issue
11
Pages
3484-3489
ISSN
  • 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6596
OpenAlex
W2156283731
Cited by
278
References
0
FWCI
5.41
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: In Vivo Pharmacodynamics of a New Oxazolidinone (Linezolid). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.46.11.3484-3489.2002
The paper
Andes, D., van Ogtrop, M. L., Peng, J., & Craig, W. A. (2002). In Vivo Pharmacodynamics of a New Oxazolidinone (Linezolid). Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.46.11.3484-3489.2002

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.