Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative pharmacokinetic profiles of Cinoxacin and pipemidic acid in humans

  • Published:
European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Serum and urinary levels of Cinoxacin and pipemidic acid were determined at 7-day intervals in the same 10 healthy volunteers after a single oral dose of respectively 500 and 400 mg of the drugs.

Comparison of results shows that Cinoxacin was absorbed faster (absorption half-life, ta 1/2cin =0.25 h) than pipemidic acid (ta 1/2pjp=0.37 h) and distributed in a smaller apparent volume (AVDc;n=23.5 1/1.73 m2; AVDpip=60.l I/I.73 m2). Biological half-lives were identical (tb 1/2cin=2.10 h; tb 1/2pip=2.15 h). On the other hand, serum levels for Cinoxacin at I, 2 and 4 hours (8.1±1.5 μg/ml, 10.6± 1.5 μg/ml, 5.6μ 1.3 μg/ml respectively) were higher than those for pipemidic acid (3.3 ±0.3 μg/ml, 3.4 ±0.5 μg/ml, 2.1 ±0.5 μg/ml respectively). Urinary excretion of the two derivatives during the 12 hours following their administration was similar (U0–12 cin =86%; U0–12h pip =83%). Mean urinary concentrations were particularly high, still attaining respectively 90 ±29 μg/ml and 131 ±38 μg/ml in samples collected between the 9th and the 12th hours; these levels were well above the M.I.C. for the Gram-negative organisms included within the spectrum of activity of these two quinolones. In addition, predictive calculations of serum levels reached after multiple dosing indicate that at an administration rate of 500 mg every 6 or preferably every 4 hours, Cinoxacin concentrations should be sufficiently high to be of interest in the treatment of systemic infections by sensitive organisms.

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

References

  1. Anderson K.E., Mardh P.A., Colleen S. (1978): Antibacterial activity and tissue distribution of Cinoxacin Curr Chemother1, 690–691.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Black H.R., Israel K.S., Farid K.Z., Nash J.F. (1978): Comparative pharmacology of Cinoxacin, nalidixic acid, oxolinic acid, nitrofurantoin and trimethoprimsulfamethoxazole Curr Chemother1, 203–204.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Black H.R., Israel K.S., Wolen R.L., Brier G.L., Obermeyer B.D., Ziege E.A., Wolny J.D. (1979): Pharmacology of Cinoxacin in humans Antimicrob Agents Chemother15, 165–170.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Brogard J.M., Kopferschmitt J., Spach M.O., Lavillaureix J., Grudet D. (1979): Cefuroxime: pharmacokinetics in subjects with normal and impaired renal function; prediction of serum concentrations and dosage adjustments Drugs Exptl Clin. Res.5, 427- 443.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Brogard J.M., Pinget M., Dorner M., Lavillaureix J. (1976): Etablissement du profil pharmacokinétique d’un antibiotique. Intérêt pratique et application à l’étude comparative des céphalosporines Bull Inst Pasteur74, 383–412.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Burt R.A.P., Morgan T., Payne J.R., Bonner R.M. (1977): Cinoxacin concentrations in plasma, urine and prostatic tissue after oral administration to man Br. J. Urology49, 147–152.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Colleen S., Andersson K.E., Mardh P.A. (1977): Studies on Cinoxacin. 3) Concentrations of Cinoxacin in serum, urine and tissues of urological patients J. Antimicrob Chemother3, p. 579–584.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. De Lajudie P. (1974): L’acide pipémidique, nouvel antibactérien de synthèse J. Pharmacol. Clin.1, 155–171.

    Google Scholar 

  9. De Rosa F., Bianchi P., Enrico P., Vissani P.M. (1980): Comparison of in vitro activity of three antiseptic drugs of urinary tract (Cinoxacin, nalidixic and oxolinic acid) on 185 strains of gram-negative bacteria Drugs Exptl. Clin. Res.6, 21–26.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Eli Lilly Laboratories Investigators Manual (1976): Cinoxacin, compound 647 16 Indianapolis, Indiana.

  11. Giamarellou H., Jackson G.G. (1975): Antibacterial activity of Cinoxacin in vitro Antimicrob Agents Chemother7, 688–692.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Humbert G., Fillastre J.P., Leroy A. (1976): Etude de l’élimination urinaire d’un nouvel antibactérien de synthèse, l’acide pipémidique, chez le sujet normal et l’insuffisant rénal Sem Hôp Paris, Thérapeutique,52. no h.s., 32–38.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Israel K.S., Black H.R., Nelson R.L., Brunson M.K., Nash J.F., Brier G.L., Wolney J.D. (1978): Cinoxacin: pharmacokinetics and the effect of Probenecid J. Clin. Pharmacol.18, 491–499.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jones R.N., Fuchs P.C. (1976): In vitro antimicrobial activity of Cinoxacin against 2968 clinical bacterial isolates Antimicrob Agents Chemother10, 146–149.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Maigaard S., Moller N.F., Welling P.G., Madsen P.O. (1979): Cinoxacin: pharmacokinetics and tolerance in patients with normal and impaired renal function Antimicrob Agents Chemother16, 411–416.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mardh P.A., Coolleen S., Andersson K.E. (1977): Studies on Cinoxacin. 1) In vitro activity of Cinoxacin, as compared to nalidixic acid, against urinary tract pathogens J. Antimicrob. Chemother.3, 411–416.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Monnier J., Bourse R., Suau Y. (1976): Etude bactériologique et pharmacocinétique d’un nouvel antibactérien urinaire, l’acide pipémidique Sem. Hôp. Paris, Thérapeutique52, n0 h.s., 7–15.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Montay G., Vigouroux M., Roquet F., Reynier M. (1977): Dosage spectrofluorimétrique de l’acide pipémidique dans les liquides biologiques. Absorption digestive et élimination urinaire chez le rat, le lapin, le chien et l’homme Thérapie32, 553–561.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ott J.L., Gordee R.S. (1980): Cinoxacin, a synthetic antibacterial agent that inhibitis transfer of R factors Curr Chemother Inf Dis1, 741–742. Proceedings of the 11th ICC and the 19th ICAAC, Ed. J.D. Nelson and G. Grassi, ASM, Washington (1980).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rodriguez N., Madsen P.O., Welling P.G. (1979): Influence of Probenecid on serum levels and urinary excretion of Cinoxacin Antimicrob Agents Chemother15, 465–469.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shimizu M., Nakamura S., Takase Y., Kurobe N. (1975): Pipemidic acid: absorption, distribution and excretion Antimicrob Agents Chemother7, 441–446.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Soussy C.J., Thibault M., Duval J. (1976): L’acide pipémidique, activité antibactérienne, comparaison avec l’acide nalidixique Sem Hôp Paris, Thérapeutique22 no h.s., 16–22.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wick W.E.D., Preston W.A., White W.A., Gordee A.S. (1973): Compound 647 16, a new synthetic antibacterial agent Antimicrob Agents Chemother4, 415–420.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brogard, J.M., Comte, F. & Lavillaureix, J. Comparative pharmacokinetic profiles of Cinoxacin and pipemidic acid in humans. European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics 8, 251–259 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03188755

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03188755

Key words

Navigation