Comparative pharmacokinetics and safety of ciprofloxacin 400 mg iv thrice daily versus 750 mg po twice daily

Abstract

Comparative pharmacokinetics of i.v. and oral ciprofloxacin was studied in 24 healthy male subjects given 400 mg i.v. tds or 750 mg po bd in a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, crossover fashion with at least a 10 day washout period. Blood and urine samples were obtained following the first (single dose) and last (steady state) dose in each treatment period. After single dosing and under steady state conditions, the calculated 24 h area under the serum concentration versus time curve, (AUC0-24) after 400 mg i.v. tds (AUC0-8 x 3) was equivalent to the AUC0-24 after 750 mg po bd (AUC0-12 x 2). Peak serum concentrations produced by the i.v. regimen were very similar to those observed after the 750 mg oral dose. The extent of accumulation was similar following either dosing regimen and was approximately 35%. Overall, the incidence of adverse effects (none of which was serious) was higher with the i.v. regimen than with the oral regimen, mainly due to injection site reaction, which was the most commonly reported adverse event.

Evolution of Ciprofloxacin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in In Vitro Pharmacokinetic Environments

“…Drug, diluent, and elimination pumps of the in vitro system were set at appropriate rates to simulate a ciprofloxacin elimination half-life of 4 h based on pharmacokinetics in adults with normal renal function (10,51,52). Growth control experiments for each strain were conducted over 36 h at the same pump rates used for ciprofloxacin dosage regimen simulations.…”

Antibioticoterapia oral versus endovenosa em crianças neutropênicas febris recebendo quimioterapia

“…5 Group A was treated with 30 mg/kg/day of ciprofloxacin given orally every 12 hours (up to a maximum daily dose of 1,500 mg) in combination with 30 mg/kg/day of amoxycillin/ clavulanate, every 8 hours (up to a maximum daily dose of 1,500 mg), also given orally, plus an intravenous placebo.…”

“…More recently, many researchers have demonstrated that febrile neutropenic patients comprise a heterogeneous group and may have several different levels of risk for complications related to the oncologic treatment. 1 In the last few years, several studies have tried to identify clinical and laboratory factors that make it possible to detect, in a heterogeneous group of neutropenic patients, Oral vs. intravenous empirical antimicrobial therapy in febrile neutropenic patients receiving childhood cancer chemotherapy Ângela Rech Cagol, 1 Cláudio Galvão de Castro Junior, 2 Maria Cristina Martins, 3 Adão Leal Machado, 4 Renato Chagas Ribeiro, 5 Lauro J. Gregianin, 6 Algemir Lunardi Brunetto 7 There is increasing evidence supporting the idea that neutropenic patients at low risk do not necessarily need long-term hospitalization and broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy for invasive bacterial infections. The strategies for this group include short-term antimicrobial treatments with consequent reduction of the length of hospital stay and outpatient management by means of oral antibiotics.…”

“…We decided to use ciprofloxacin and amoxicillinclavulanate as the oral regimen because both agents are well absorbed when orally administered and because this association offers good coverage against gram-negative bacilli and gram-positive cocci. 5 In a group of inpatients, we compared the effectiveness of the oral therapy vs. cefepime, which may be an alternative to intravenous monotherapy in patients with febrile neutropenia.…”

Oral vs. intravenous empirical antimicrobial therapy in febrile neutropenic patients receiving childhood cancer chemotherapy

“…Os autores escolheram ciprofloxacina e amoxicilina/clavulanato como regime oral, porque ambos agentes são bem absorvidos quando ingeridos por via oral e porque essa associação apresenta boa cobertura contra bacilos gram-negativos e cocos gram-positivos 5 . Num conjunto de pacientes hospitalizados, comparou-se a eficácia da terapêutica oral versus cefepime, que se mostra como uma das opções de monoterapia endovenosa utilizada em pacientes com neutropenia febril.…”