The majority of dermal wounds are colonized with aerobic and anaerobic microorganisms that originate predominantly from mucosal surfaces such as those of the oral cavity and gut. The role and significance of microorganisms in wound healing has been debated for many years. While some experts consider the microbial density to be critical in predicting wound healing and infection, others consider the types of microorganisms to be of greater importance. However, these and other factors such as microbial synergy, the host immune response, and the quality of tissue must be considered collectively in assessing the probability of infection. Debate also exists regarding the value of wound sampling, the types of wounds that should be sampled, and the sampling technique required to generate the most meaningful data. In the laboratory, consideration must be given to the relevance of culturing polymicrobial specimens, the value in identifying one or more microorganisms, and the microorganisms that should be assayed for antibiotic susceptibility. Although appropriate systemic antibiotics are essential for the treatment of deteriorating, clinically infected wounds, debate exists regarding the relevance and use of antibiotics (systemic or topical) and antiseptics (topical) in the treatment of nonhealing wounds that have no clinical signs of infection. In providing a detailed analysis of wound microbiology, together with current opinion and controversies regarding wound assessment and treatment, this review has attempted to capture and address microbiological aspects that are critical to the successful management of microorganisms in wounds.

Wound microbiology and associated approaches to wound management.

These guidelines were developed jointly by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Surgical Infection Society (SIS), and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA). This work represents an update to the

/pdf/clinical-practice-guidelines-for-antimicrobial-prophylaxis-1gq1adk8ux.pdf

Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery

Summary: Bacteroides species are significant clinical pathogens and are found in most anaerobic infections, with an associated mortality of more than 19%. The bacteria maintain a complex and generally beneficial relationship with the host when retained in the gut, but when they escape this environment they can cause significant pathology, including bacteremia and abscess formation in multiple body sites. Genomic and proteomic analyses have vastly added to our understanding of the manner in which Bacteroides species adapt to, and thrive in, the human gut. A few examples are (i) complex systems to sense and adapt to nutrient availability, (ii) multiple pump systems to expel toxic substances, and (iii) the ability to influence the host immune system so that it controls other (competing) pathogens. B. fragilis, which accounts for only 0.5% of the human colonic flora, is the most commonly isolated anaerobic pathogen due, in part, to its potent virulence factors. Species of the genus Bacteroides have the most antibiotic resistance mechanisms and the highest resistance rates of all anaerobic pathogens. Clinically, Bacteroides species have exhibited increasing resistance to many antibiotics, including cefoxitin, clindamycin, metronidazole, carbapenems, and fluoroquinolones (e.g., gatifloxacin, levofloxacin, and moxifloxacin).

Bacteroides: the Good, the Bad, and the Nitty-Gritty

The formulation and delivery of biopharmaceutical drugs, such as monoclonal antibodies and recombinant proteins, poses substantial challenges owing to their large size and susceptibility to degradation. In this Review we highlight recent advances in formulation and delivery strategies — such as the use of microsphere-based controlled-release technologies, protein modification methods that make use of polyethylene glycol and other polymers, and genetic manipulation of biopharmaceutical drugs — and discuss their advantages and limitations. We also highlight current and emerging delivery routes that provide an alternative to injection, including transdermal, oral and pulmonary delivery routes. In addition, the potential of targeted and intracellular protein delivery is discussed.

Overcoming the challenges in administering biopharmaceuticals: formulation and delivery strategies

/pdf/clinical-practice-guidelines-for-antimicrobial-prophylaxis-yxd0y9e4ks.pdf

Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery.

The macrolide antibiotics include natural members, prodrugs and semisynthetic derivatives. These drugs are indicated in a variety of infections and are often combined with other drug therapies, thus creating the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions. Macrolides can both inhibit drug metabolism in the liver by complex formation and inactivation of microsomal drug oxidising enzymes and also interfere with microorganisms of the enteric flora through their antibiotic effects. Over the past 20 years, a number of reports have incriminated macrolides as a potential source of clinically severe drug interactions. However, differences have been found between the various macrolides in this regard and not all macrolides are responsible for drug interactions. With the recent advent of many semisynthetic macrolide antibiotics it is now evident that they may be classified into 3 different groups in causing drug interactions. The first group (e.g. troleandomycin, erythromycins) are those prone to forming nitrosoalkanes and the consequent formation of inactive cytochrome P450-metabolite complexes. The second group (e.g. josamycin, flurithromycin, roxithromycin, clarithromycin, miocamycin and midecamycin) form complexes to a lesser extent and rarely produce drug interactions. The last group (e.g. spiramycin, rokitamycin, dirithromycin and azithromycin) do not inactivate cytochrome P450 and are unable to modify the pharmacokinetics of other compounds. It appears that 2 structural factors are important for a macrolide antibiotic to lead to the induction of cytochrome P450 and the formation in vivo or in vitro of an inhibitory cytochrome P450-iron-nitrosoalkane metabolite complex: the presence in the macrolide molecules of a non-hindered readily accessible N-dimethylamino group and the hydrophobic character of the drug. Troleandomycin ranks first as a potent inhibitor of microsomal liver enzymes, causing a significant decrease of the metabolism of methylprednisolone, theophylline, carbamazepine, phenazone (antipyrine) and triazolam. Troleandomycin can cause ergotism in patients receiving ergot alkaloids and cholestatic jaundice in those taking oral contraceptives. Erythromycin and its different prodrugs appear to be less potent inhibitors of drug metabolism. Case reports and controlled studies have, however, shown that erythromycins may interact with theophylline, carbamazepine, methylprednisolone, warfarin, cyclosporin, triazolam, midazolam, alfentanil, disopyramide and bromocriptine, decreasing drug clearance. The bioavailability of digoxin appears also to be increased by erythromycin in patients excreting high amounts of reduced digoxin metabolites, probably due to destruction of enteric flora responsible for the formation of these compounds. These incriminated macrolide antibiotics should not be administered concomitantly with other drugs known to be affected metabolically by them, or at the very least, combined administration should be carried out only with careful patient monitoring.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Pharmacokinetic Drug Interactions of Macrolides

Leuprorelin acetate is a synthetic agonist analogue of gonadotropin-releasing hormone. Continued leuprorelin administration results in suppression of gonadal steroid synthesis, resulting in pharmacological castration. Since leuprorelin is a peptide, it is orally inactive and generally given subcutaneously or intramuscularly. Sustained release parenteral depot formulations, in which the hydrophilic leuprorelin is entrapped in biodegradable highly lipophilic synthetic polymer microspheres, have been developed to avoid daily injections. The peptide drug is released from these depot formulations at a functionally constant daily rate for 1, 3 or 4 months, depending on the polymer type [polylactic/glycolic acid (PLGA) for a 1-month depot and polylactic acid (PLA) for depot of >2 months], with doses ranging between 3.75 and 30mg. Mean peak plasma leuprorelin concentrations (Cmax) of 13.1, 20.8 to 21.8, 47.4, 54.5 and 53 µg/L occur within 1 to 3 hours of depot subcutaneous administration of 3.75, 7.5, 11.25, 15 and 30 mg, respectively, compared with 32 to 35 µg/L at 36 to 60 min after a subcutaneous injection of 1mg of a non-depot formulation. Sustained drug release from the PLGA microspheres maintains plasma concentrations between 0.4 and 1.4 µg/L over 28 days after single 3.75, 7.5 or 15mg depot injections. Mean areas under the concentration-time curve (AUCs) are similar for subcutaneous or intravenous injection of short-acting leuprorelin 1mg; a significant dose-related increase in the AUC from 0 to 35 days is noted after depot injection of leuprorelin 3.75, 7.5 and 15mg. Mean volume of distribution of leuprorelin is 37L after a single subcutaneous injection of 1mg, and 36, 33 and 27L after depot administration of 3.75, 7.5 and 15mg, respectively. Total body clearance is 9.1 L/h and elimination half-life 3.6 hours after a subcutaneous 1mg injection; corresponding values after intravenous injection are 8.3 L/h and 2.9 hours. A 3-month depot PLA formulation of leuprorelin acetate 11.25mg ensures a Cmax of around 20 µg/L at 3 hours after subcutaneous injection, and continuous drug concentrations of 0.43 to 0.19 µg/L from day 7 until before the next injection. Recently, an implant that delivers leuprorelin for 1 year has been evaluated. Serum leuprorelin concentrations remained at a steady mean of 0.93 µg/L until week 52, suggesting zero-order drug release from the implant. In general, regular or depot leuprorelin treatment is well tolerated. Local reactions are more common after application of the 3- or 4-month depot in comparison with the 1-month depot.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Depot Leuprorelin

The renewed interest in macrolide antibacterials with expanded indications for clinical use, as well as their markedly increased usage, justifies the continuous search for new compounds designed to offer the patient not only enhanced bioavailability but also a reduced incidence of adverse effects. Macrolides are an old and well established class of antimicrobial agents that account for 10 to 15% of the worldwide oral antibiotic market. Macrolides are considered to be one of the safest anti-infective groups in clinical use, with severe adverse reactions being rare. Newer products with improved features have recently been discovered and developed, maintaining or significantly expanding the role of macrolides in the management of infection. This review deals with the tolerability of the clinically available macrolide antibacterials. With the exception of drug interactions, adverse effects have been analysed during the last 40 years in many thousands of adult and paediatric patients. Recently developed derivatives have been compared with the older compounds, and the expected and well assessed adverse effects have been set apart from those which are unusual, very rare or questionable. Gastrointestinal reactions represent the most frequent disturbance, occurring in 15 to 20% of patients on erythromycins and in 5% or fewer patients treated with some recently developed macrolide derivatives that seldom or never induce endogenous release of motilin, such as roxithromycin, clarithromycin, dirithromycin, azithromycin and rikamycin (rokitamycin). Except for troleandomycin and some erythromycins administered at high dose and for long periods of time, the hepatotoxic potential of macrolides, which rarely or never form nitrosoalkanes, is low for josamycin, midecamycin, miocamycin, flurithromycin, clarithromycin and roxithromycin; it is negligible or absent for spiramycin, rikamycin, dirithromycin and azithromycin. Transient deafness and allergic reactions to macrolide antibacterials are highly unusual and have definitely been shown to be more common following treatment with the erythromycins than with the recently developed 14-, 15- and 16-membered macrolides. There have been case reports in the literature of 51 patients during the last 30 years who experienced uncommon or dubious adverse effects after treatment with older compounds and in which there appears to be strong evidence of a causal relationship with the drug. Only 3 cases had an unfavourable outcome, and these were patients administered erythromycin lactobionate intravenously too rapidly or at high dose. Targets of these occasional reactions are generally the heart, liver and central nervous system. Other unusual organ pathologies are related to immunomediated disorders more than to primary parenchymal toxicity, or to the rarely serious consequences of macrolide-induced alterations in intestinal microflora.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Adverse effects of macrolide antibacterials.

Two methotrexate-resistant sublines, CCRF-CEM R3/7 and CCRF-CEM R30/6, were selected from the human leukemia T-lymphoblast cell line, CCRF-CEM, after repeated exposures (7 and 6 times, respectively) for 24 h to constant concentrations (3 and 30 µm) of the drug. Analysis of the mechanism of resistance revealed no differences in levels of dihydrofolate reductase activity, its binding affinity for methotrexate, or in methotrexate transport between the CCRF-CEM parent and methotrexate-resistant cell lines. The development of resistance to methotrexate was associated with a marked decrease in the intracellular level of methotrexate polyglutamates. Although the resistant sublines were able to form substantial amounts of folate polyglutamates when measured with [3H]folic acid, the level of polyglutamates formed was decreased to about 50% of that formed by the parent cell line. No qualitative differences in folate polyglutamates formed were noted between the parental and resistant sublines.

This is the first example of a cell line which displays resistance which is solely attributable to defective methotrexate polyglutamate synthesis.

https://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/canres/48/8/2149.full.pdf

Impaired polyglutamylation of methotrexate as a cause of resistance in CCRF-CEM cells after short-term, high-dose treatment with this drug.

The pharmacokinetic aspects in humans of macrolide antibiotics that are currently or soon to be on the market (i.e. erythromycin, oleandomycin, spiramycin, josamycin, midecamycin, miocamycin, rosaramycin, roxithromycin and azithromycin) are reviewed. Macrolide antibiotics are basic compounds, poorly soluble in water, which are mostly absorbed in the alkaline intestinal environment. They are acid unstable, but the newer semisynthetic derivatives (i.e. roxithromycin and azithromycin) are characterised by increased stability under acidic conditions. Macrolides are highly liposoluble and consequently penetrate well into tissue, especially bronchial secretions, prostatic tissue, middle ear exudates and bone tissues, as evidenced by tissue/serum concentration ratios greater than 1. They do not penetrate well into the CSF. Macrolides undergo extensive biotransformation in the liver. With a few exceptions (e.g. miocamycin), the metabolites of these drugs are characterised by little or no antimicrobial activity. Plasma protein binding is variable from one compound to another. At therapeutic concentrations, protein-bound erythromycin accounts for 80 to 90% of the total drug present in the blood, and the fraction is 95% for roxithromycin. The lowest values of protein-bound fraction are observed for midecamycin and josamycin (about 15%), and intermediate values are reported for spiramycin and miocamycin. However, the clinical relevance of this parameter is not clearly established. Plasma half-life (t1/2) values vary for the macrolides described: erythromycin, oleandomycin, josamycin and miocamycin have a t1/2 ranging from 1 to 2 hours; spiramycin, erythromycin stearate, the mercaptosuccinate salt of propionyl erythromycin and rosaramicin have an intermediate t1/2 (about 7, 6.5, 5 and 4.5 hours, respectively); the newer semisynthetic compounds roxithromycin and azithromycin are characterised by high t1/2 values (i.e. 11 and 41 hours, respectively). Under normal conditions, the major route of elimination is the liver. Renal elimination also takes place but it contributes to total clearance only to a small degree, as evidenced by low renal clearance values. The degree of modification of macrolide pharmacokinetics by renal insufficiency or hepatic disease is usually not considered clinically relevant, and no recommendation for dose modification is necessary in these patients. The pharmacokinetics of macrolides are modified in elderly patients. Accordingly, their use must be accompanied by a closer than usual clinical monitoring of the older patient.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Piero Periti

Papers

Pharmacokinetic Drug Interactions of Macrolides

Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Depot Leuprorelin

Adverse effects of macrolide antibacterials.

Impaired polyglutamylation of methotrexate as a cause of resistance in CCRF-CEM cells after short-term, high-dose treatment with this drug.

Clinical pharmacokinetic properties of the macrolide antibiotics. Effects of age and various pathophysiological states (Part II).