Exploration of Clinical Breakpoint of Danofloxacin for in Plasma and in PELF
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
In order to establish the clinical breakpoint (CBP) of danofloxacin against , three cutoff values, including epidemiological cutoff value (ECV), pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) cutoff value (CO) and clinical cutoff value (CO), were obtained in the present study. The ECV was calculated using ECOFFinder base on the MIC distribution of danfloxacin against 347 collected from disease pigs. The CO was established based on in vivo and ex vivo PK-PD modeling of danofloxacin both in plasma and pulmonary epithelial lining fluid (PELF) using Hill formula and Monte Carlo analysis. The CO was established based on the relationship between the possibility of cure (POC) and MIC in the clinical trials using the "WindoW" approach, nonlinear regression and CART analysis. The MIC and MIC of danofloxacin against 347 were 2 μg/mL and 8 μg/mL, respectively. The ECV value was set to 8 μg/mL using ECOFFinder. Concentration-time curves of danofloxacin were fitted with a two-compartment PK model. The PK parameters of the maximum concentration (C) and area under concentration-time curves (AUC) in PELF were 3.67 ± 0.25 μg/mL and 24.28 ± 2.70 h·μg/mL, higher than those in plasma (0.67 ± 0.01 μg/mL and 4.47 ± 0.51 h·μg/mL). The peak time (T) in plasma was 0.23 ± 0.07 h, shorter than that in PELF (1.61 ± 0.15 h). The CO in plasma and PELF were 0.125 μg/mL and 0.5 μg/mL, respectively. The CO calculated by WindoW approach, nonlinear regression and CART analysis were 0.125-4 μg/mL, 0.428 μg/mL and 0.56 μg/mL, respectively. The 0.5 μg/mL was selected as eligible CO. The ECV is much higher than the CO and CO, and the clinical breakpoint based on data in plasma was largely different from that of PELF. Our study firstly established three cutoff values of danofloxacin against It suggested that non-wild-type danofloxacin-resistant may lead to ineffective treatment by danofloxacin.
Surveillance of in Texas tortoises () for translocation with emphasis on treatment and recovery.
Moeller C, Perales S, Rodriguez W, Martin A, Eversole C, Rideout-Hanzak S Front Vet Sci. 2025; 11:1525179.
PMID: 39897159 PMC: 11782240. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1525179.
Wang H, Liao C, Ding K, Zhang L, Wang L BMC Vet Res. 2024; 20(1):241.
PMID: 38831324 PMC: 11145865. DOI: 10.1186/s12917-024-04016-9.
Wang S, Huang A, Gu Y, Li J, Huang L, Wang X Antibiotics (Basel). 2022; 11(3).
PMID: 35326865 PMC: 8944443. DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics11030403.
PK-PD Modeling and Optimal Dosing Regimen of Acetylkitasamycin against in Piglets.
Huang A, Mao F, Huang L, Xie S, Pan Y, Qu W Antibiotics (Basel). 2022; 11(2).
PMID: 35203885 PMC: 8868236. DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics11020283.
Comparison of PK/PD Targets and Cutoff Values for Danofloxacin Against and in Piglets.
Zhou Y, Sun Z, Wang R, Li J, Niu C, Li X Front Vet Sci. 2022; 9:811967.
PMID: 35187143 PMC: 8847440. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.811967.