Skip to main content
Log in

In vitro activity of Ro 15-8074 and Ro 19-5247 in comparison to cefaclor and cefalexin

In vitro-Aktivität von Ro 15-8074 und Ro 19-5247 im Vergleich zu Cefaclor und Cefalexin

  • Originalia
  • Published:
Infection Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

805 clinical isolates were investigated for theirin vitro sensitivity against Ro 15-8074 and Ro 19-5247 in comparison to cefaclor and cefalexin in a serial dilution test on solid medium. Ro 19-5247 had the strongest activity of all drugs tested against streptococci (exceptStreptococcus faecalis) and was as active as cefaclor and cefalexin against most strains ofStaphylococus aureus. Ro 19-5247 was the only oral cephalosporin active againstBordetella pertussis. It was on average 160 times more active than cefaclor againstHaemophilus influenzae. In its activity against enterobacteria Ro 19-5247 was always superior to cefaclor and cefalexin. Only a few strains ofEnterobacter aerogenes, Enterobacter cloacae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus vulgaris andSerratia marcescens were resistant to Ro 19-5247 as were all strains ofEnterobacter agglomerans andKlebsiella ozaenae. Ro 15-8074 was inactive against staphylococci but ten times more active than cefaclor and cefalexin againstStreptococcus pyogenes. There was no difference in the activity againstStreptococcus pneumoniae andStreptococcus agalactiae. AgainstHaemophilus influenzae Ro 15-8074 acted 12 times stronger than cefaclor and 100 times stronger than cefalexin. The activity against enterobacteria corresponded to that of Ro 19-5247. Ro 15-8074 was also active against most strains ofEnterobacter cloacae andProteus vulgaris which were resistant to cefaclor and cefalexin.

Zusammenfassung

805 klinische Isolate wurden im Reihenverdünnungsversuch mit den neuen Oralcephalosporinen Ro 15-8074 und Ro 19-5274 im Vergleich zu Cefaclor und Cefalexin geprüft. Ro 19-5247 hatte die stärksteIn vitro-Aktivität gegen Streptokokken (mit Ausnahme vonStreptococcus faecalis) und war gegen die meistenStaphylococcus aureus-Stämme ebenso wirksam wie Cefaclor und Cefalexin. Ro 19-5247 wirkte als einziges Oralcephalosporin gegenBordetella pertussis. Es war gegenHaemophilus influenzae im Durchschnitt 160fach stärker als Cefaclor. Bei Enterobakterien war Ro 19-5247 dem Cefaclor und Cefalexin stets überlegen. Resistent waren wenige Stämme vonEnterobacter aerogenes, Enterobacter cloacae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus vulgaris undSerratia marcescens sowie alle Stämme vonEnterobacter agglomerans undKlebsiella ozaenae. Ro 15-8074 war gegen Staphylokokken in therapeutischen Konzentrationen immer unwirksam. Es wirkte gegenStreptococcus pyogenes zehnfach stärker als Cefaclor und Cefalexin, während beiStreptococcus pneumoniae undStreptococcus agalactiae kein Unterschied bestand. GegenHaemophilus influenzae wirkte Ro 15-8074 im Durchschnitt 12fach stärker als Cefaclor und 100fach stärker als Cefalexin. Bei Enterobakterien entsprach die Wirksamkeit von Ro 15-8074 etwa der von Ro 19-5247. Es wirkte auch gegen die meisten Stämme vonEnterobacter cloacae undProteus vulgaris, bei denen Cefaclor und Cefalexin unwirksam waren.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature

  1. Peeters, M., Piot, P. In vitro activity of Ro 15-8074, a new oral cephalosporin. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 16 (1985) 469–473.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ng, W. S., Chau, P. Y., Leung, Y. K., Wong, P. C. L. In vitro activity of Ro 15-8074, a new oral cephalosporin, againstNeisseria gonorrhoeae. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 28 (1985) 461–463.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Knothe, H. In vitro activity of cefaclor. Infection 7 (1979) 518–526.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Levin, R. M., Azimi, P. H., Dunphy, M. G. Susceptibility ofHaemophilus influenzae type b to cefaclor and influence of inoculum size. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 22 (1982) 923–925.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Schassan, H. H. Resistance of gram-negative bacteria against cefaclor and other antibiotics. Infection 7 (1979) 527–531.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Braveny, I. In vitro activity of cefaclor againstHaemophilus influenzae in comparison to various oral chemotherapeutical agents. Infection 7 (1979) 532–535.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Grimm, H. Bacteriologicalin vitro investigation with cefaclor. Infection 7 (1979) 540–542.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Simon, C. In vitro activity of Ro 15-8074 and Ro 19-5247 in comparison to cefaclor and cefalexin. Infection 15, 122–124 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01650213

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01650213

Keywords

Navigation