Roxithromycin in-vitro susceptibility testing of Haemophilus influenzae by NCCLS methods. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards

Roxithromycin. An update of its antimicrobial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use

Roxithromycin is a derivative of the macrolide antibacterial erythromycin with in vitro antibacterial activity resembling that of the parent compound. The drug has activity against some Staphylococcus spp., many Streptococcus spp., Moraxella (Branhamella) catarrhalis, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila and Chlamydia trachomatis as well as many less common organisms. Measured using recently proposed guidelines, roxithromycin has in vitro activity against Haemophilus influenzae. In comparison with that of its parent compound, the pharmacokinetic profile of roxithromycin is characterised by high plasma, tissue and body fluid concentrations and a long half-life permitting an extended dosage interval. Roxithromycin has proven clinical efficacy in upper and lower respiratory infections, skin and soft tissue infections, urogenital infections and orodental infections, and appears to be as effective as more established treatments including erythromycin, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid and cefaclor. The drug has also shown promise in a variety of more specialised indications including opportunistic infections in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients and as part of a Helicobacter pylori eradication regimen. Roxithromycin is very well tolerated with an overall incidence of adverse events of approximately 4%. Thus, roxithromycin is an attractive therapeutic alternative in its established indications, especially when the option of once-daily administration is considered.

Validation of NCCLS macrolide (azithromycin, clarithromycin, and erythromycin) interpretive criteria for Haemophilus influenzae tested with the Haemophilus test medium. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards

Some recently marketed macrolide antimicrobial agents possess physiochemical, antimicrobial, and pharmacokinetic advantages that enable their wider clinical use against Haemophilus influenzae infections. A five-laboratory study assessed the validity of existing or proposed azithromycin, clarithromycin, and erythromycin interpretive criteria for tests with H. influenzae isolates. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) methods, criteria, and quality-control guidelines were used. A total of 350 H. influenzae strains were processed, including fresh clinical isolates (250 strains) and replicate tests of 100 stock cultures sampling strains isolated from 1984 to 91. Azithromycin interpretive criteria (susceptible at < or = 4 micrograms/ml, > or = 12 mm) produced a 99.8% absolute agreement between the minimum inhibitory concentrations and disk diffusion results (0.2% false-susceptible error). Clarithromycin breakpoint criteria (susceptible at < or = 8 micrograms/ml, > or = 13 mm; and resistant at > or = 32 micrograms/ml, < or = 10 mm) produced high minor interpretive error, but < or = 1% combined false-susceptible and false-resistant discrepancies. Erythromycin interpretive guidelines were initially proposed for susceptible at < or = 0.5 microgram/ml, > or = 26 mm. This categorizes nearly all H. influenzae strains as resistant to this older macrolide. The NCCLS should consider the proposed erythromycin criteria for publication in appropriate tables, and a class drug should also be selected (azithromycin) that would best predict macrolide-class susceptibility for those agents indicated by the US Food and Drug Administration for H. influenzae infection chemotherapy (azithromycin and clarithromycin). No serious interpretive problems were observed with the current NCCLS criteria using Haemophilus test medium.