Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia based on pharmacokinetic analysis

Koichiro Yoshida, Yoshihito Niki, Niro Okimoto, Michihiro Kishimoto, Hiroshi Fukano, Hiroki Hara, Toshiharu Matsushima, Hirohide Yoneyama et al.

Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy, 2011

18 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Moxifloxacin is a respiratory quinolone that is expected to be useful for treating community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, but few clinical studies and not a detailed evaluation of its pharmacokinetics have been conducted in Japan in patients with pneumonia. We assessed the efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin in 18 patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia using pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis. There was significant improvement in body temperature, white blood cell count, C-reactive protein, and chest X-ray score on day 3 of moxifloxacin treatment, which persisted until the completion of treatment (all p < 0.05). Nine strains, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, Moraxella catarrhalis, Haemophilus influenzae, and Enterobacter cloacae, were isolated from sputum cultures of nine patients. The isolated strains were eradicated by moxifloxacin. The mean area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours [AUC(0-24 h) (AUC(0-24 h,ss))], maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), and trough plasma level (C(trough)) of moxifloxacin at steady state was 52.0 μg h/ml, 4.5, and 0.9 μg/ml, respectively. Mean AUC(0-24 h,ss)/mimimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), and C(max)/MIC ratios for patients in whom MICs of moxifloxacin were determined for pathogenic bacteria were 723 and 62, respectively. The median AUC(0-24 h,ss)/MIC and C(max)/MIC ratios (based on Monte Carlo simulation employing MICs for 257 strains of S. pneumoniae collected during a respiratory infection…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 18 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free