Drugs

, Volume 47, Issue 4, pp 677–700 | Cite as

Levofloxacin

A Review of its Antibacterial Activity, Pharmacokinetics and Therapeutic Efficacy
  • Rick Davis
  • Harriet M. Bryson
Drug Evaluation

Summary

Synopsis

Levofloxacin, an oral fluoroquinolone antibacterial agent, is the optical S-(-) isomer of ofloxacin. In vitro it is generally twice as potent as ofloxacin. Levofloxacin is active against most aerobic Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms and demonstrates moderate activity against anaerobes. Drug penetration into body tissues and fluids is rapid and widespread after oral administration. In clinical trials conducted in Japan, oral levofloxacin has demonstrated antibacterial efficacy against a variety of infections, including upper and lower respiratory tract, genitourinary, obstetric, gynaecological and skin and soft tissue. In comparative trials with ofloxacin, levofloxacin, at half the daily dosage of ofloxacin, showed equivalent efficacy and a reduced incidence of adverse effects in the treatment of lower respiratory tract and complicated urinary tract infections.

Levofloxacin has a tolerability profile similar to that of other oral fluoroquinolones, with gastrointestinal and central nervous system effects reported most commonly. Theophylline dosage adjustment does not appear to be necessary in patients receiving concomitant levofloxacin. Coadministration with antacids or with other drugs containing divalent or trivalent cations reduces levofloxacin absorption.

Thus, levofloxacin has potential as a broad spectrum antibacterial drug in the treatment of a variety of infections. However, clinical trials recruiting non-Japanese patients are in progress and these results will form a basis on which future recommendations for the broader use of levofloxacin can be made.

Pharmacodynamic Properties

The mechanism of action of levofloxacin, like that of other fluoroquinolones, involves inhibition of bacterial deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) gyrase, a type II topoisomerase. It has a broad range of in vitro activity against most aerobic Gram-negative bacteria, although some strains may show only moderate susceptibility (Providencia rettgeri and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) or resistance (Serratia marcescens). MIC90 values are somewhat higher against Gram-positive bacteria, but these organisms are usually susceptible. Levofloxacin, in common with other available fluoroquinolones, demonstrates only moderate activity against anaerobes

Mean MIC90 values for levofloxacin were about 50% lower than those observed for ofloxacin against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and 3 to 4 times lower than those for ciprofloxacin against methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Mean MIC90 values for levofloxacin were approximately 50% higher than those observed for ciprofloxacin against most Gram-negative bacteria. Ciprofloxacin showed greater in vitro activity than levofloxacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Inhibition of bacterial multiplication by levofloxacin was not influenced by growth medium types while the presence of serum and inoculum size had equivocal effects. Acidic pH or the addition of urine may reduce the in vitro antibacterial activity of levofloxacin. Levofloxacin usually has additive or indifferent effects when combined with other antibacterial agents in vitro, but may occasionally show synergy or antagonism. A postantibiotic effect for levofloxacin has been exhibited against methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant S. aureus, S. epidermidis, Enterococcus faecalis and Escherichia coli.

Resistance to fluoroquinolones occurs at a low rate in vitro and is chromosomally mediated. Changes to the A or B subunits of DNA gyrase or cell membrane porin channels are 3 possible mechanisms of chromosomal mutation which can confer bacterial resistance to the fluoroquinolones. Apart from 1 unconfirmed report in S. aureus, plasmid-mediated resistance has not been noted with fluoroquinolones. Although no specific data regarding its resistance pattern are available, levofloxacin will be likely to display a pattern similar to its racemate, ofloxacin.

Levofloxacin was generally as efficacious or more efficacious than ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin or norfloxacin in protecting mice against experimentally induced systemic infections, lower respiratory tract infections and pyelonephritis. At therapeutic concentrations, the drug penetrates into human phagocytes in vitro without affecting cell viability.

Pharmacokinetic Properties

Following oral administration of levofloxacin 50 to 200mg in healthy volunteers, mean maximum plasma concentrations ranging from 0.57 to 2.04 mg/L were achieved within 0.8 to 2.4 hours; these parameters are linearly related to dose. Food does not appear to affect the absorption of levofloxacin, which has an oral bioavailability approaching 100%. The apparent mean volume of distribution of levofloxacin ranges from 1.09 to 1.26 L/kg after administration of single 50, 100 or 200mg doses to healthy volunteers. Oral levofloxacin penetrates rapidly and efficiently throughout the body, achieving concentrations in tissues or body fluids which are generally higher than those observed in plasma

Within 24 hours of an administered oral dose, about 80 to 85% of the drug is excreted unchanged in the urine. The mean plasma elimination half-life of levofloxacin is 4 to 7 hours. The elimination half-life and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of levofloxacin increase proportionally as creatinine clearance decreases. Therefore, prolongation of the normal dosage interval and/or dosage reduction of levofloxacin is necessary in patients with impaired renal function.

Therapeutic Etlicacy

The efficacy of oral levofloxacin (mostly 100mg 3 times daily) has been investigated in both noncomparative trials and controlled comparative studies with ofloxacin in Japanese patients with a variety of infections. In comparisons with ofloxacin, levofloxacin was mostly administered at half the daily dosage of ofloxacin

Levofloxacin has proven effective in the treatment of acute or chronic lower respiratory tract infections (bronchitis and pneumonia) and was as effective as ofloxacin in comparative trials. Eradication rates for levofloxacin against common respiratory pathogens [Haemophilus injluenzae, Moraxella (Branhamella) catarrhalis, S. aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae] were 80 to 100%, while those against P. aeruginosa were lower (about 30%).

In patients with either complicated (upper) or uncomplicated (lower) urinary tract infections, levofloxacin achieved clinical and bacteriological efficacy rates that ranged from 80 to 100%. In women with uncomplicated cystitis, single dose levofloxacin 200mg yielded clinical efficacy rates of 100% on day 3 and 94% on days 7 and 14. Levofloxacin 200 to 300 mg/day displayed clinical and bacteriological efficacy rates comparable to treatment with ofloxacin 400 to 600 mg/day in patients with complicated urinary tract infections. Clinical and bacteriological efficacy rates of 100% were achieved for levofloxacin 200 to 400 mg/day administered for 3 days to patients with gonococcal urethritis and 14 days to patients with nongonococcal (chlamydial) urethritis. Levofloxacin showed clinical efficacy in men with acute prostatitis (100%), chronic prostatitis (74%) and acute or chronic epididymitis (88%). The short duration of levofloxacin therapy (<15 days) used in the treatment of chronic prostatitis may have limited its effectiveness.

Skin and soft tissue infections were responsive to treatment with levofloxacin (clinical efficacy rates 80 and 91% in 2 large trials), while eradication rates for methicillin-susceptible S. aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci were approximately 90%.

Clinical cure/improvement was observed in 93% of women with various obstetric and gynaecological infections treated with levofloxacin 200 to 300 mg/day. Eradication rates of > 90% were observed for commonly isolated pathogens which included C. trachomatis, E. coli, S. aureus, Streptococcus spp., Peptostreptococcus spp. and E. faecalis.

Clinical efficacy rates of 74 to 92% have been achieved with levofloxacin in noncomparative studies of patients with a variety of ear, nose and throat infections. Overall bacteriological eradication rates were 100% for H. influenzae and M. catarrhalis, 97% for Streptococcus spp. and 93% for methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant S. aureus, with lower rates observed for coagulase- negative staphylococci (75%) and P. aeruginosa (66%). Levofloxacin has also displayed clinical efficacy in bacterial enteritis (97% of patients cured or improved) and in ocular infections (92%), odontogenic infections (83%) and biliary tract infections (73%) investigated in single clinical trials.

Tolerability

Levofloxacin is generally well tolerated, with most adverse effects being mild to moderate in severity and transient in nature. In 5 comparative trials with ofloxacin which recruited a total of 918 patients, a lower incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms (1.2 vs 5.2%) [abdominal discomfort, anorexia or diarrhoea] and central nervous system effects (0.8 vs 2.2%) [insomnia, headache or dizziness] was observed in levofloxacin recipients. In comparative trials, the overall incidence of abnormal laboratory findings (mostly transient elevations of liver function tests, eosinophilia or leucopenia) with levofloxacin (2.4 to 15.5%) was similar to that observed with ofloxacin (4.3 to 18.2%)

Levofloxacin, in common with other fluoroquinolones, has been shown to cause articular damage in animal studies at high dosages. In addition, the phototoxic potential of levofloxacin as assessed in mice appears to be similar to that of ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin and lower than that of lomefloxacin, enoxacin and nalidixic acid.

Dosage and Administration

In Japanese studies, the most frequently used dosage was 100mg 3 times daily for the treatment of a variety of infections, including respiratory, genitourinary, obstetric, gynaecological, skin, oral, ear, nose, throat, enteral, biliary tract and eye infections. Treatment duration ranged from 7 to 14 days, although a shorter duration (3 to 5 days) was sufficient for the treatment of urinary tract infections (uncomplicated and complicated) or gonococcal urethritis. A single 200mg dose has been successfully used for women with uncomplicated cystitis.

Dosage reduction is required in patients with renal impairment. Patients should not receive concomitant levofloxacin and mineral supplements, vitamins with iron or other minerals, antacids, or sucralfate. If required, these drugs should be administered at least 2 hours before or after levofloxacin. The pharmacokinetics of theophylline are not significantly affected by levofloxacin; however, patients receiving this combination should still be monitored for clinical signs of theophylline toxicity.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Acer JF, O’Brien TF, Goldstein FW, Jones RN. The epidemiology of bacterial resistance to quinolones. Drugs 45 (Suppl. 3): 24–28, 1993Google Scholar
  2. Akabane K, Kato M, Takayama S. Involvement of inhibitory and excitatory neutrotransmitters in levofloxacin- and ciprofloxacin-induced convulsions in mice. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 37: 1764–1770, 1993Google Scholar
  3. Anjo S, Kondo Y, Ishibashi Y, Arai T. Effect of quinolones on human neutrophil chemotaxis. Correspondence. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 30: 240–242, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Baba S. Clinical studies on DR-3355 in the field of otorhinolaryngology. Poster: Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Chemotherapy, Berlin, pp. 2110–2111, 1991Google Scholar
  5. Baba S, Miyamoto N, Vnno T, Naito Y, Yanai O, et al. Clinical evaluation of the effect of levofloxacin on sinusitis. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 365–378, 1992aGoogle Scholar
  6. Baba S, Miyamoto N, Yanai O, Tamura Y, Tokoro Y, et al. Study on the penetration of levofloxacin (DR-3355) into the otorhinolaryngeal tissues and discharges in patients. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 326–333, 1992bGoogle Scholar
  7. Bellido F, Pechère J-C. Laboratory survey of fluoroquinolone activity. Reviews ofInfectious Diseases 11 (Suppl. 5): S917-S924, 1989Google Scholar
  8. Cambau E, Gutmann L. Mechanisms of resistance to quinolones. Drugs 45 (Suppl. 3): 15–23, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Chida T, Shibaoka H, Ishizuka I, Nakaya R. The effect of DL-8280, a new antimicrobial agent of pyridone-carboxylic acid derivative, on human fecal flora. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 32 (Suppl. 1): 109–117, 1984Google Scholar
  10. Christ W. Central nervous system toxicity of quinolones: human and animal findings. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 26: 219–225, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Davey PG. Overview of drug interactions with the quinolones. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 22 (Suppl. C): 97–107, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Flor S, Guay DRP, Opsahl JA, Tack K, Matzke GR. Effects of magnesium-aluminum hydroxide and calcium carbonate antacids on bioavailability of ofloxacin. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 34: 2436–2438, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Foleno BD, Lafredo SC, Fu KP. In vitro activity of levofloxacin, ofloxacin and other quinolones against coagulase-negative staphylococci. Microbiology (Basel) 39: 120–123, 1993Google Scholar
  14. Fu KP, Grace ME, Hsiao CL, Hung PP. Elimination of antibiotic-resistant plasmids by quinolone antibiotics. Chemotherapy (Basel) 34: 415–418, 1988Google Scholar
  15. Fu KP, Foleno B, Rosenthale ME. The postantibiotic suppressive effect of L-ofloxacin, an optically active isomer of ofloxacin. Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease 15: 375–378, 1992aPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Fu KP, Lafredo SC, Foleno B, Isaacson DM, Barrett JF, et al. In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activities oflevofloxacin (l-ofloxacin), an optically active ofloxacin. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 36: 860–866, 1992bPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Fujimoto T, Mitsuhashi S. In vitro antibacterial activity of DR-3355, the S-(-)-isomer of ofloxacin. Chemotherapy (Basel) 36: 268–276, 1990Google Scholar
  18. Furuhama K, Akahane K, Tawara K, Takayama S. Interaction of the new quinolone antibacterial agent levofloxacin with fenbufen in mice. Arzneimittel-Forschung 42: 406–408, 1992Google Scholar
  19. Gaja M, Higa F, Yamashiro T, Nakamoto A, Miyara T, et al. Penetration of levofloxacin, a new quinolone antibacterial agent, into human neutrophils. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 64–67, 1992Google Scholar
  20. Gargallo-Viola O, Esteve M, Moros M, Coli R, Xicota MA, et al. Comparative in vitro and in vivo activities of six new monofluoroquinolone and difluoroquinolone 3-carboxylic acids with a 7 -azetidin ring substituent. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 34: 2318–2326, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gargallo-Viola O, Esteve M, LLovera S, Roca X, Guinea J. In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activities of E-4497, a new 3-amine-3-methyl-azetidinyl tricyclic fluoroquinolone. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 35(3): 442–447, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Giamarellou H, Kolokythas E, Petrikkos G, Gazis J, Aravantinos D, et al. Pharmacokinetics of three newer quinolones in pregnant and lactating women. American Journal of Medicine 87 (Suppl. 5A): 49–51, 1989Google Scholar
  23. Goto S, Miyazaki S, Ishida Y. In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activities of a new quinolone, levofloxacin (DR-3355). In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 14–26, 1992Google Scholar
  24. Guay DRP. Fluoroquinolone drug-drug interactions. Hospital Therapy 15: 825–832, 1990Google Scholar
  25. Guay DRP. The role of the fluoroquinolones. Pharmacotherapy 12 (Suppl.): 7IS-85S, 1992Google Scholar
  26. Higa F, Gaja M, Kusano N, Kitsukawa K, Shigeno Y, et al. Effect of glucocorticoid on the uptake of antibiotics by human polymorphonuclear leukocytes. Poster: Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Chemotherapy, Berlin, pp. 152–153, 1991Google Scholar
  27. Hirose T, Kumamoto Y, Nishimura M, Aoki M, Tsukamoto T, et al. Clinical efficacy of levofloxacin (LVFX) single-dose therapy in female acute uncomplicated cystitis. In Japanese. Kansenshogaku Zasshi 66: 177–188, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Hooper DC, Wolfson JS. Fluoroquinolone antimicrobial agents. New England Journal of Medicine 324: 384–394, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Horiuchi S, Inagaki Y, Yamamoto N, Ogawa M, Nakaya R. In vitro antimicrobial activity of DR-3355, a new quinolone antibacterial agent, against clinical isolates of enteritis-causing bacteria. In Japanese. Kansenshogaku Zasshi 66: 51–58, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Hoshino K, Sato K, Akahane K, Yoshida A, Hayakawa I, et al. Significance of the methyl group on the oxazine ring of ofloxacin derivatives in the inhibition of bacterial amd mammalian type II topoisomerases. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 35: 309–312, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Hoshino K, Sato K, Une T, Osada Y. Inhibitory effects of quinolones on DNA gyrase of Escherichia coli and topoisomerase II of fetal calf thymus. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 33: 1816–1818, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Hukagawa H, Noga K. A study on the concentrations of levofloxacin in the gallbladder tissue and bile of patients. In Japanese. Japanese Journal of Antibiotics 45: 253–257, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Imamura M, Shibamura S, Hayakawa I, Osada Y. Inhibition of DNA gyrase by optically active ofloxacin. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 31: 325–327, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Inagaki Y, Horiuchi S, Une T, Nakaya R. In-vitro activity of DR-3355, an optically active isomer of ofloxacin, against bacterial pathogens associated with travellers’ diarrhoea. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 24: 547–549, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Inagaki Y, Nakaya R, Chida T, Hashimoto S. The effect of levofloxacin, an optically-active isomer of ofloxacin, on fecal microflora in human volunteers. Japanese Journal of Antibiotics 45: 241–252, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Inoue S, Misaki M, Matsumura K. Intraocular penetration of DR-3355. In Japanese. Journal of the Eye 9: 487–490, 1992Google Scholar
  37. Ishii T, Takayama M. Phase III clinical study oflevofloxacin in otitis media and otitis externa. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 334–351, 1992Google Scholar
  38. Ito K, Mikamo H, Izumi K, Tamaya T, Hirose R, et al. Penetration of levofloxacin into gynecological tissues. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 306–310, 1992Google Scholar
  39. Iwamoto K, Naora K, Katagiri Y, Ichikawa N, Hayashibara M, et al. Comparative neurotoxicity study of ciprofloxacin and sparfloxacin after coadministration with fenbufen in rats. Drugs 45 (Suppl. 3): 290–291, 1993Google Scholar
  40. Jones RN, Wiedemann B, Simone DE, Monteil H, Yamaguchi K. International surveillance of ofloxacin resistance. 18th International Congress on Chemotherapy, Stockholm, June/July 1993Google Scholar
  41. Kato M, Furuhama K, Woolley APAH, Ashby R, Fowler JSL, et al. Twenty-six-week oral toxicity of the new quinolone antibacterial agent levofloxacin in rats and cynomolgus monkeys. Arzneimittel-Forschung 42: 367–373, 1992Google Scholar
  42. Kawada Y, Kumamoto Y, Aso Y, Machida T, Saito I, et al. Comparative study on levofloxacin and ofloxacin in complicated urinary tract infections. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 230–248, 1992aGoogle Scholar
  43. Kawada Y, Kumamoto Y, Aso Y, Machida T, Saito I, et al. Dose-finding study on levofloxacin in complicated urinary tract infections. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 210–229, 1992bGoogle Scholar
  44. Kawada Y, Murakami S, Aso Y, Machida T, Saito I, et al. Studies on the clinical value of levofloxacin in the treatment of genitourinary tract infections. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 249–269, 1992cGoogle Scholar
  45. Kitsukawa K, Hara J, Saito A. Inhibition of Legionella pneumophila in guinea pig peritoneal macrophages by new quinolone, macrolide and other antimicrobial agents. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 27: 343–353, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Korten V, Murray BE. Impact of the fluoroquinolones on gastrointestinal flora. Drugs 45 (Suppl. 3): 125–133, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Lafredo SC, Foleno BD, Fu KP. Induction of resistance of Streptococcus pneumoniae to quinolones in vitro. Microbiology (Basel) 39: 36–39, 1993Google Scholar
  48. Lewin CS, Allen RA, Amyes SGB. Antibacterial activity of fluoroquinolones in combination with zidovudine. Journal of Medical Microbiology 33: 127–131, 1990aPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Lewin CS, Allen RA, Amyes SGB. Potential mechanisms of resistance to the modem fluorinated 4-quinolones. Journal of Medical Microbiology 31: 153–162, 1990bPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Lewin CS, Amyes SGB, Smith JT. Bactericidal activity of enoxacin and lomefloxacin against Escherichia coli KL16. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology 8: 731–733, 1989Google Scholar
  51. Lewin CS, Amyes SGB. The bactericidal activity of DR-3355, an optically active isomer of ofloxacin. Journal of Medical Microbiology 30: 227–231, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Lewin CS, Morrissey I, Smitb JT. The fluoroquinolones exert a reduced rate of kill against Enterococcus faecalis. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology 43: 492–494, 1991aPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Lewin CS, Morrissey I, Smith JT. The mode of action of quinolones: the paradox in activity of low and high concentrations and activity in the anaerobic environment. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 10: 240–248, 1991bGoogle Scholar
  54. Lewin CS, Smith JT. Interactions of 4-quinolones witb other antibacterials. European Journal of Medical Microbiology 29: 221–227, 1989Google Scholar
  55. Lode H, Höffken G, Olschewski P, Sievers B, Kirch A, et al. Pharmacokinetics of ofloxacin after parenteral and oral administration. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 31: 1338–1342, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Lomaestro BM, Bailie GR. Effect of staggered dose of calcium on the bioavailability of ciprofloxacin. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 35: 1004–1007, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Maddix DS, Warner L. Do we need an intravenous fluoroquinolone? Western Journal of Medicine 157: 55–59, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Madinger NE, McGregor JA, McKinney PJ, Dembeck ST, Haskell CS, et al. Comparative antibiotic susceptibilities of anaerobes associated witb infections of the female reproductive tract. Clinical Infectious Diseases 16 (Suppl. 4): S349-S352, 1993Google Scholar
  59. Marchbanks CR. Drug-drug interactions witb fluoroquinolones. Pharmacotherapy 13: 23S-28S, 1993Google Scholar
  60. Matsuda S, Oh K, Hirayama H, Shimizu T, Kimura H, et al. Clinical study of levofloxacin (LVFX) on the infectious diseases in the field of obstetrics and gynecology. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40: 311–325, 1992Google Scholar
  61. Maxwell A, Gellert M. Mechanistic aspects of DNA topoisomerases. Advances in Protein Chemistry 38: 69–107, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Morrissey I, Lewin CS, Smith JT. The influence of oxygen upon bactericidal potency. In Crumplin (Ed.) The 4-quinolones: Antibacterial agents in vitro, pp. 23–36, Springer-Verlag, London, 1990Google Scholar
  63. Morrissey I, Smith JT. The effect of inoculum size on 4-quinolone uptake by Escherichia coli KL-16. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology 45 (Suppl): 1106, 1993Google Scholar
  64. Murata M, Ohnishi K, Irimajiri S, Matsuoka Y, Obana M, et al. Clinical trial of levofloxacin (DR-3355) and fecal drug concentration and change in the fecal microflora in infectious enteritis. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 170–187, 1992Google Scholar
  65. Nakamori Y, Tsuboi E, Narui K, Nakatani T, Nakata K. Sputum penetration of levofloxacin and its clinical efficacy in patients with chronic lower respiratory tract infections. In Japanese. Japanese Journal of Antibiotics 45: 539–547, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Nakashima M, Uematsu T, Kanamaru M, Okazaki O, Hakusui H. Phase I study of levofloxacin, (S)-(-)-ofloxacin. Japanese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 23: 515–520, 1992Google Scholar
  67. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; Fourth Information Supplement. NCCLS Document MI00-S4, NCCLS, Villanova, Pennsylvania, 1992Google Scholar
  68. Neu HC, Kumada T, Chin N-X. The post-antimicrobial suppressive effect of quinolone agents. Drugs Under Experimental and Clinical Research 13: 63–67, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Neu HC. Synergy and antagonism of combinations of quinolones. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 10: 255–261, 1991Google Scholar
  70. Nielsen KT, Madsen PO. Quinolones in urology. Urology Research 17: 117–124, 1989Google Scholar
  71. Niki Y, Hashiguchi K, Okimoto N, Soejima R. Quinolone antimicrobial agents and theophylline. Correspondence. Chest 101: 881, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Nix DE, Watson WA, Handy L, Frost RW, Rescott DL, et al. The effect of sucralfate pretreatment on the pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin. Pharmacotherapy 9: 377–380, 1989aPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Nix DE, Watson WA, Lerner ME, Frost RW, Krol G, et al. Effects of aluminum and magnesium and ranitidine on the absorption of ciprofloxacin. Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 46: 700–705, 1989bGoogle Scholar
  74. Nix DE, Wiltion JH, Ronald B, Distierath L, Williams VC, et al. Inhibition of norfloxacin absorption by antacids. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 34: 432–435, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Nozaki-Renard J, Iino T, Sato Y, Marumoto Y, Ohta G, et al. Fluoroquinolones protect the human lymphocyte CEM cell line from HIV-1-mediated cytotoxicity. Cell Structure and Function 15: 295–299, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Ohi Y, Goto T, Kawahara K, Kawahara M, Kawabata T, et al. Penetration of fluoroquinolones into human spinal fluid. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40: 469–473, 1992Google Scholar
  77. Ohyama M, Nobori T, Shima T, Matsunaga S, Ohno F, et al. A clinical study on levofloxacin in treatment of tonsillitis, pharyngitis and sialadenitis. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 352–364, 1992Google Scholar
  78. Okazaki O, Kojima C, Hakusui H, Nakashima M. Enantioselective disposition of ofloxacin in humans. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 35: 2106–2109, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Okimoto N, Niki Y, Soejima R. Effect of levofloxacin on serum concentration of theophylline. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 68–74, 1992Google Scholar
  80. Ooishi M, Miyao M, Oomomo A, Hosaka A, Hirokawa H, et al. Clinical efficacy of levofloxacin in bacterial infections of the eye. In Japanese. Journal of the Eye 9: 475–481, 1992Google Scholar
  81. Pascual A, Garcia I, Perea EJ. Uptake and intracellular activity of an optically active ofloxacin isomer in human neutrophils and tissue culture cells. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 34: 277–280, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Patel JA, Pachucki CT, Lentino JR. Synergy of levofloxacin (Lofloxacin) and oxacillin against quinolone-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, measured by the time-kill method. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 37: 339–341, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Pfaller MA, Barry AL, Fuchs PC. Levofloxacin disk potency and tentative interpretive criteria for susceptibility tests. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 31(7): 1924–1926, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Rodríguez-Noriega, E, Morfín-Otero R, Esparza-Ahumada S. The use of quinolones in developing countries. Drugs 45 (Suppl. 3): 42–45, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Saito A, Irabu Y, Fuknhura H, Motomiya M, Oizumi K, et al. Dose finding comparative study on levofloxacin (LVFX) in chronic respiratory tract infection. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 75–96, 1992aGoogle Scholar
  86. Saito A, Oguchi K, Harada Y, Shinoda I, Komeda H, et al. Pharmacokinetics of levofloxacin in patients witb impaired renal function. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 188–195, 1992bGoogle Scholar
  87. Saito A, Shigeno Y, Irabu Y, Fukuhara H, Saito A, et al. Clinical study on levofloxacin in the field of internal medicine. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 147–169, 1992cGoogle Scholar
  88. Saito I, Suzuki A, Saiko Y, Yokozawa M, Ono K, et al. Acute nongonococcal epididymitis-pharmacological and therapeutic aspects oflevofloxacin. In Japanese. Hinyokika Kiyo 38: 623–628, 1992dPubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Sasaki J, Morishima T, Shiiki K, Yamane N, Sakamoto H, et al. Clinical study of levofloxacin in treatment of odontogenic infections. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 379–391, 1992Google Scholar
  90. Scazzocchio F, Selan L, Oliva B, Schippa S, Collini L, et al. Inhibition of plasmid conjugation by some recently synthesized 4-qninolone compounds. Chemioterapia 7: 295–297, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Shiba K, Sakai O, Shimada J, Okazaki O, Aoki H, et al. Effects of antacids, ferrous sulphate, and ranitidine on absorption of DR-3355 in humans. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 36: 2270–2274, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. Smith JT, Lewin CS. Chemistry and mechanisms of action of the quinolone antibacterials. In Andriole VT (Ed.) The quinolones, pp. 23–82, Academic Press, London, 1988Google Scholar
  93. Soejima R, Kawane H, Okimoto N, Umeki S, Sumi M, et al. Comparative study of levofloxacin and ofloxacin in bacterial pneumonia by the double-blind method. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 121–146, 1992aGoogle Scholar
  94. Soejima R, Kawane H, Okimoto N, Umeki S, Sumi M, et al. Comparative study of levofloxacin and ofloxacin in chronic respiratory tract infections by the double-blind method. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 97–120, 1992bGoogle Scholar
  95. Taira K, Koga H, Kohno S. Accumulation of a newly developed fluoroquinolone, OPC-17116, by human polymorphonuclear leukocytes. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 37: 1877–1881, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. Takahashi H, Mogi S, Kobayashi M, Fukaya T, Ohkawara A, et al. Assay of skin level and clinical investigation oflevofloxacin in the treatment of skin infections. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 286–305, 1992Google Scholar
  97. Tanaka M, Une T, Osada Y. Sub-inhibitory and post-antibiotic effects of an optically active isomer of ofloxacin. Arzneimittel-Forschung 39: 750–754, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Tanaka M, Otsuki M, Una T, Nishino T. In-vitro and in-vivo activity of DR-3355, an optically active isomer of ofloxacin. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 26: 659–666, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Tanaka M, Ishii H, Sato K, Osada Y, Nishino T. Characterization of high-level quinolone-resistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aUreus. Abstract no. 808, p. 233. 31st ICAAC, Chicago, 1991aGoogle Scholar
  100. Tanaka M, Sato K, Kimura Y, Hayakawa I, Osada Y, et al. Inhibition by quinolones of DNA gyrase from Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 35: 1489–1491, 1991bPubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Tanaka M, Otsuki M, Nishino T. Bactericidal activities of ofloxacin and its optically active isomer (DR-3355) on non-growing cells of Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Chemotherapy (Basel) 38: 21–27, 1992Google Scholar
  102. Tanimura H, Ohnishi H, Okamura T, Uenishi M, Ichimiya G, et al. Chemotherapy of biliary tract infections (XXXVII). Excretion into bile and gallbladder tissue levels of levofloxacin and its clinical effect in biliary tract infections. In Japanese. Japanese Journal of Antibiotics 45: 557–568, 1992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. Todd PA, Faulds D. Ofloxacin. A reappraisal of its antimicrobial activity, pharmacology and therapeutic use. Drugs 42: 825–876, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Tomii T, Fukuda M, Sasaki K. Penetration of l-ofloxacin (DR-3355) into the lacrimal fluid. In Japanese. Japanese Journal of Clinical Ophthalmology 45: 1607–1610, 1991Google Scholar
  105. Une T, Fujimoto T, Sato K, Osada Y. In vitro activity of DR-3355, an optically active ofloxacin. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 32(9): 1336–1340, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. Van Siooten AD, Nix DE, Wilton JH, Love JH, Spivey JM, et al. Combined use of ciprofloxacin and sucralfate. Drug Intelligence and Clinical Pharmacy 25: 578–582, 1991Google Scholar
  107. Wagai N, Yamaguchi F, Sekiguchi M, Tawara K. Phototoxic potential of quinolone antibacterial agents in Balblc mice. Toxicology Letters 54: 299–308, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. Wagai N, Tawara K. Quinolone antibacterial-agent-induced cutaneous phototoxicity: ear swelling reactions in Balblc mice. Toxicology Letters 58: 215–223, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. Wagai N, Yoshida M, Takayama S. Phototoxic potential of the new quinolone antibacterial agent levofloxacin in mice. Arzneimittel-Forschung 42: 404–405, 1992Google Scholar
  110. Watanabe K, Kato N, Muto Y, Bandou K, Ueno K. Antibacterial activity of levofloxacin, S-isomer of ofloxacin, against anaerobic bacteria. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 57–63, 1992Google Scholar
  111. Wolfson JS, Hooper DC. Fluoroquinolone antimicrobial agents. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 2: 378–424, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. Wolfson JS, Hooper DC. The fluoroquinolones: structures, mechanisms of action and resistance, and spectra of activity in vitro. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 28: 581–586, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. Yamashita M, Sawada K, Chokyu H, Miyazaki S, Kuwayama M, et al. Prostatic tissue levels oflevofloxacin. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 203–209, 1992Google Scholar
  114. Yokota T, Suzuki E, Arai K, Kanda K. In vitro antibacterial activity of levofloxacin, its selective toxicity and influence on axon dendrites. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 27–35, 1992Google Scholar
  115. Yura J, Shinagawa N, Ishikawa S, Mashita K, Suzui K, et al. Clinical evaluation of levofloxacin, a new quinolone, in patients with surgical infections. In Japanese. Chemotherapy 40 (Suppl. 3): 271–286, 1992Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rick Davis
    • 1
  • Harriet M. Bryson
    • 1
  1. 1.Adis International LimitedMairangi Bay, Auckland 10New Zealand

Personalised recommendations