Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22964254›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2012

Comparative pharmacodynamics of the new oxazolidinone tedizolid phosphate and linezolid in a neutropenic murine Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia model.

Alexander J Lepak, Karen Marchillo, Solen Pichereau, William A Craig, David R Andes

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. [Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Methicillin-resistantThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Radiosynthesis and Biodistribution ofACS infectious diseases · 2020
    Article
  12. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2018
    Article
  16. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2017
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Linezolid for Infants and Toddlers With Disseminated Tuberculosis: First Steps.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2016
    Article
  19. Tedizolid Phosphate: a Next-Generation Oxazolidinone.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2015
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexander J LepakUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Karen Marchillo
Solen Pichereau
William A Craig
David R Andes
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tedizolid phosphate (TR-701) is a novel oxazolidinone prodrug (converted to the active form tedizolid [TR-700]) with potent Staphylococcus aureus activity. The current studies characterized and compared the in vivo pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PD) characteristics of TR-701/TR-700 and linezolid against methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) in the neutropenic murine pneumonia model. The pharmacokinetic properties of both drugs were linear over a dose range of 0.625 to 40 mg/kg of body weight. Protein binding was 30% for linezolid and 85% for TR-700. Mice were infected with one of 11 isolates of S. aureus, including MSSA and community- and hospital-acquired MRSA strains. Each drug was administered by oral-gastric gavage every 12 h (q12h). The dosing regimens ranged from 1.25 to 80 mg/kg/12 h for linezolid and 0.625 to 160 mg/kg/12 h for TR-701. At the start of therapy, mice had 6.24 ± 0.40 log(10) CFU/lungs, which increased to 7.92 ± 1.02 log(10) CFU/lungs in untreated animals over a 24-h period. A sigmoid maximum-effect (E(max)) model was used to determine the antimicrobial exposure associated with net stasis (static dose [SD]) and 1-log-unit reduction in organism relative to the burden at the start of therapy. The static dose pharmacodynamic targets for linezolid and TR-700 were nearly identical, at a free drug (non-protein-bound) area under the concentration-time curve over 24 h in the steady state divided by the MIC (AUC/MIC ratio) of 19 and 20, respectively. The 1-log-unit kill endpoints were also similar, at 46.1 for linezolid and 34.6 for TR-700. The exposure targets were also comparable for both MSSA and MRSA isolates. These dosing goals support further clinical trial examination of TR-701 in MSSA and MRSA pneumonia.

Indexed as

AcetamidesAdministration, OralAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsArea Under CurveBlood ProteinsColony Count, MicrobialDisease Models, AnimalDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleLinezolidLungMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMiceMice, Inbred ICRAcetamidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsBlood ProteinsLinezolidOrganophosphatesOxazolesOxazolidinonesProdrugstedizolid phosphate

Identifiers

PMID22964254
PMCPMC3486526
OpenAlexW2166422764

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.