ライフサイエンスコーパス: levofloxacin

1 ent randomization (784 to placebo and 781 to levofloxacin).

2 acin-containing therapy (PPI + amoxicillin + levofloxacin).

3 7 hours for ciprofloxacin and 26.5 hours for levofloxacin.

4 ed to investigate the efficacy and safety of levofloxacin.

5 oxifloxacin, and 1.41 (95% CI, .91-2.18) for levofloxacin.

6 The infection was successfully treated with levofloxacin.

7 m formation and resistance to the antibiotic levofloxacin.

8 did not differ significantly from that with levofloxacin.

9 le with poor dentition that was treated with levofloxacin.

10 pp mutant of CO92 and given the same dose of levofloxacin.

11 family Enterobacteriaceae were resistant to levofloxacin.

12 ng women initiated therapy with ofloxacin or levofloxacin.

13 patients who were treated for pneumonia with levofloxacin.

14 fected with S. aureus ATCC 25923 compared to levofloxacin.

15 t treatment outcomes with clarithromycin and levofloxacin.

16 Positive candidates were treated with levofloxacin.

17 es rifampicin, pyrazinamide, ethambutol, and levofloxacin.

18 e to vancomycin and >90% were susceptible to levofloxacin.

19 e susceptible to penicillin, cefotaxime, and levofloxacin.

20 aluable precursor of the antimicrobial agent Levofloxacin.

21 scular mortality related to azithromycin and levofloxacin.

22 s a key precursor of the antimicrobial agent Levofloxacin.

23 0.25 mug/ml), ethambutol (0.25 to 2 mug/ml), levofloxacin (0.12 to 1 mug/ml), moxifloxacin (0.06 to 0

24 ent for the individuals drugs were 99.1% for levofloxacin, 100% for amikacin, 97.4% for capreomycin,

25 ities were the following: ceftazidime, 100%; levofloxacin, 100%; ciprofloxacin, 95.0%; tobramycin, 90

26 (10/31) and 54.5% of patients randomized to levofloxacin (18/33, P = .094) completed prophylaxis.

27 ), ciprofloxacin (264,626 prescriptions), or levofloxacin (193,906 prescriptions).

28 Ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin, 2 fluoroquinolone antimicrobials, are >=90

29 r ciprofloxacin, 2.41 (95% CI, .76-7.68) for levofloxacin, 2.00 (95% CI, 1.06-3.79) for norfloxacin,

30 se rifampin (15 mg per kilogram per day) and levofloxacin (20 mg per kilogram per day) for the first

31 th higher-dose rifampicin (15 mg/kg/day) and levofloxacin (20 mg/kg/day) for the first 8 weeks.

32 fluoroquinolones included 22 of 52 (42%) to levofloxacin, 20 of 54 (37%) to ciprofloxacin, 16 of 47

33 se fluoroquinolone (ciprofloxacin, 500 mg/d; levofloxacin, 250-500 mg/d; or norfloxacin, 400 mg/d).

34 8) for metronidazole, 18% (95% CI 15-22) for levofloxacin, 3% (95% CI 2-5) for amoxicillin, and 4% (9

35 or a 10-day modified sequential therapy with Levofloxacin 500 mg id instead of Clarithromycin (group

36 mg twice daily, amoxicillin 1 g twice daily, levofloxacin 500 mg twice daily, and tinidazole 500 mg t

37 followed by esomeprazole 40 mg twice daily, levofloxacin 500 mg twice daily, and tinidazole 500 mg t

38 1 g/d) for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral levofloxacin (500 mg once daily) and metronidazole (500

39 ducted to compare the efficacy and safety of levofloxacin (500 mg q24h for 9 months) initiated in pat

40 omly assigned to receive a 3-month course of levofloxacin (500 mg/d; n = 76) or placebo (n = 78) star

41 gle-dose azithromycin (500 mg; 106 persons), levofloxacin (500 mg; 111 persons), or rifaximin (1650 m

42 to erythromycin (94.1%) and, less commonly, levofloxacin (54.6%), in addition to beta-lactam agents.

43 eceived tuberculosis preventive therapy with levofloxacin, 5620 incident tuberculosis cases (95% UI 4

44 88.0%; sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim, 77.5%; levofloxacin, 58.5%; oxacillin, 54.7%; ciprofloxacin, 51

45 een treatment arms (azithromycin, 3.8 hours; levofloxacin, 6.4 hours; rifaximin, 5.6 hours).

46 bactam (788, 10.3%; 95% CI, 9.6%-11.0%), and levofloxacin (694, 9.1%; 95% CI, 8.5%-9.7%).

47 n, 82%; erythromycin, 82%; clindamycin, 73%; levofloxacin, 73%; trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, 9%; an

48 ), amoxicillin (95.9%), metronidazole (77%), levofloxacin (87.7%), and tetracycline (98.2%).

49 xacin, 129 microM; gatifloxacin, 130 microM; levofloxacin, 915 microM; and ciprofloxacin, 966 microM.

50 indamycin (98.6%), erythromycin (99.0%), and levofloxacin (99.6%), in addition to beta-lactam agents.

51 the susceptibility rates to clindamycin and levofloxacin according to patient age group.

52 r uveitis, while current first-time users of levofloxacin (adjusted rate ratio, 1.26 [95% CI, 0.90-1.

53 tribution of the pretreated barley straw for levofloxacin adsorption was estimated based on the equil

54 A dose-ranging study with meropenem and levofloxacin alone and in combination against Pseudomona

55 The four drugs studied were levofloxacin, amikacin, capreomycin, and ethionamide.

56 cases of resistance to both pyrazinamide and levofloxacin among Hr-TB patients, except for the Philip

57 r amoxicillin/clavulanate, erythromycin, and levofloxacin among S. pneumoniae and for trimethoprim/su

58 m (S), 19 to 27 mm (I), and </=18 mm (R) for levofloxacin and >/=25 mm (S), 16 to 24 mm (I), and </=1

59 coccal isolates resistant or intermediate to levofloxacin and 124 pneumococcal isolates susceptible t

60 reported in 306 participants (31.9%) taking levofloxacin and 125 (13.0%) taking placebo (risk differ

61 Ten of 12 laboratories testing levofloxacin and 4 of 4 laboratories testing ofloxacin b

62 The critical concentration established for levofloxacin and amikacin was 1.5 microg/ml, that establ

63 m 2/2017-10/2018 recipients received empiric levofloxacin and azithromycin at transplant until testin

64 /2017 to 10/2018 recipients received empiric levofloxacin and azithromycin at transplant until testin

65 infection and continued for 7 days, bilosome levofloxacin and bilosome doxycycline formulations were

66 The activities of levofloxacin and clarithromycin against 199 penicillin-

67 Levofloxacin and linezolid were tested as comparator age

68 When concentrations of various antibiotics (levofloxacin and linezolid) are pumped through the chann

69 Bacterial resistant to levofloxacin and meropenem was seen in the control arm.

70 intravenous ertapenem followed by 5 days of levofloxacin and metronidazole resulted in treatment suc

71 published MIC breakpoints for Salmonella to levofloxacin and ofloxacin, but breakpoints for assignin

72 breakpoints in the MIC zone scattergrams for levofloxacin and ofloxacin, the following disk diffusion

73 d by 1.5-fold for ceftriaxone and 2-fold for levofloxacin and remained the same for vancomycin.

74 greement was 100% for both ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin and the CA was 81.0% and 65.5%, respectivel

75 to vancomycin (100%), linezolid (>99%), and levofloxacin and tigecycline (both >96%); imipenem susce

76 Susceptibilities to levofloxacin and TMP-SMZ were 29.3% and 36.6%, respectiv

77 al S. maltophilia isolates nonsusceptible to levofloxacin and/or TMP-SMZ.

78 om 1.0-16.6% for ofloxacin, to 0.5-12.4% for levofloxacin, and 0.9-14.6% for moxifloxacin when tested

79 ganisms [MIC50 or MIC90]) for ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and doxycycline for both the PEPAbx and tr

80 uivalent doses of gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and doxycycline were administered upon fev

81 008 microg/ml) was slightly more active than levofloxacin, and E-test results were generally elevated

82 intermediate to high MICs for moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, and gentamicin were also observed among th

83 patients receiving isoniazid, gatifloxicin, levofloxacin, and moxifloxacin monotherapy.

84 y broth microdilution against ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and ofloxacin and by disk diffusion using

85 The MICs for ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and ofloxacin were >32 mug/ml for all isol

86 diameters for nalidixic acid, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and ofloxacin were determined for 100 clin

87 to meropenem, imipenem, cefepime, cefazolin, levofloxacin, and piperacillin-tazobactam in resin-conta

88 of meropenem, imipenem, cefepime, cefazolin, levofloxacin, and piperacillin-tazobactam on the recover

89 2-agent combinations of amikacin, doripenem, levofloxacin, and rifampin were quantitatively assessed

90 ommon (3.8%, 4.4%, and 1.9% in azithromycin, levofloxacin, and rifaximin arms, respectively) (P = .55

91 Single-dose azithromycin, levofloxacin, and rifaximin with loperamide were compara

92 ee new generation quinolones: trovafloxacin, levofloxacin, and sparfloxacin) on the DNA cleavage/reli

93 , vancomycin, nitrofurantoin, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and tetracycline.

94 nown to confer resistance to clarithromycin, levofloxacin, and tetracycline.

95 ciprofloxacin, gatifloxacin, grepafloxacin, levofloxacin, and trovafloxacin were above the maximal s

96 erial infections, treatment with vancomycin, levofloxacin, and voriconazole prophylaxis resulted in n

97 likely due to resistance to clarithromycin, levofloxacin, and/or metronidazole; these drugs, if used

98 Both fluorophores and the antibiotic levofloxacin are attached to this bio-orthogonal amino a

99 g fever onset during which ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin are fully effective treatment options for p

100 ted incidence of severe tenosynovitis in the levofloxacin arm (18.2%).

101 luded (31 in the isoniazid arm and 33 in the levofloxacin arm).

102 Treatments were saline (negative control), levofloxacin at 15 mg/kg every 12 h (positive control),

103 Compared with levofloxacin, azithromycin was not inferior (P = .01).

104 s occurred in 81.4%, 78.3%, and 74.8% of the levofloxacin, azithromycin, and rifaximin arms, respecti

105 o compare the efficacy of Clarithromycin and Levofloxacin-based sequential quadruple therapies as fir

106 Ten-day Levofloxacin-based sequential treatment achieved inadequ

107 treatment was significantly higher than with Levofloxacin-based therapy (90%, CI95%: 84-96% vs. 79%,

108 s within the triple therapy; moxifloxacin or levofloxacin-based triple therapy were both associated w

109 ble-containing regimens, an all-oral 6-month levofloxacin, bedaquiline, and linezolid-containing MDR/

110 oup A drug and specific use of moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, bedaquiline, or linezolid were associated

111 ons include changes to the ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin breakpoints for the Enterobacteriaceae and

112 to the Enterobacteriaceae ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin breakpoints.

113 Using an error rate-bound evaluation method, levofloxacin but not ciprofloxacin disk diffusion yielde

114 cultures were resistant to ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin, but all 15 strains were susceptible to spa

115 Very major discrepancies were not seen with levofloxacin, but occurred with clarithromycin in five s

116 tions for Mycobacterium tuberculosis against levofloxacin by the traditional reference method, agar p

117 Although antibiotic prophylaxis with levofloxacin can reduce the risk of serious infection in

118 (AORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and moxifloxacin compared w

119 In the cases of levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and ofloxacin, inhibition o

120 06 to November 2007, outpatient new users of levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, moxifloxacin, cephalosporin

121 azithromycin, clarithromycin, moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, or amoxicillin-clavulanate

122 loxacin/levofloxacin (n = 12), ciprofloxacin/levofloxacin combinations with doxycycline and/or gentam

123 Results show that levofloxacin concentrations of 2 microg/ml (BACTEC 460 a

124 was investigated at various temperatures and levofloxacin concentrations, and the activation energy w

125 andomized trial to determine whether a 5-day levofloxacin-containing quadruple concomitant regimen wa

126 Five days of levofloxacin-containing quadruple concomitant therapy is

127 Quadruple Levofloxacin-containing regimens could be an option for

128 adicating H pylori infection than 10 days of levofloxacin-containing sequential therapy.

129 ecommended rescue therapies include PBMT and levofloxacin-containing therapy (PPI + amoxicillin + lev

130 These results suggest that prophylactic levofloxacin could be used for patients with newly diagn

131 ction site and had an MIC of the pathogen to levofloxacin determined.

132 r quinolones (garenoxacin, gatifloxacin, and levofloxacin, each with a MIC at which 90 percent of the

133 gorical agreements for the ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin Etests were 89.6 and 83.7%, respectively.

134 mized to receive either the oral concomitant levofloxacin, ethambutol, azithromycin, and rifampin (CL

135 A new regimen combining four antibiotics (levofloxacin, ethambutol, azithromycin, and rifamycin) h

136 th ticarcillin, gentamicin and vancomycin or levofloxacin eye drops leading to enucleation in one cas

137 of four weight-adjusted once-daily doses of levofloxacin for 24 weeks (168 doses) alongside a multid

138 Ceftolozane-tazobactam was non-inferior to levofloxacin for composite cure (306 [76.9%] of 398 vs 2

139 Minor discrepancies were obtained with levofloxacin for one strain (0.5%) by microdilution and

140 lower extremity rash initially treated with levofloxacin for presumed cellulitis.

141 s to make a strong recommendation for use of levofloxacin for six months in MDR-TB exposed contacts.

142 In this paper, adsorption of levofloxacin from artificial contaminated water was done

143 ant to the newer fluoroquinolones, including levofloxacin, gatifloxacin, gemifloxacin, and garenoxaci

144 Levofloxacin generated clinical and microbiological resp

145 45 strains, were resistant to ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, gentamicin, and doxycycline.

146 Levofloxacin, gentamicin, and tetracycline were active a

147 mec-IV strains to clindamycin, erythromycin, levofloxacin, gentamicin, rifampin, minocycline, and tri

148 sis occurred in 6 participants (0.6%) in the levofloxacin group and 11 (1.1%) in the placebo group (i

149 infection in 15.7 percent of patients in the levofloxacin group and 21.6 percent of patients in the p

150 al treatment (308 [52%] of which were in the levofloxacin group and 289 [48%] of which were in the pl

151 he mean follow-up time was 46.5 weeks in the levofloxacin group and 46.3 weeks in the placebo group (

152 ad developed in 5 participants (1.1%) in the levofloxacin group and in 12 participants (2.6%) in the

153 viruria occurred in 22 patients (29%) in the levofloxacin group and in 26 patients (33.3%) in the pla

154 al regimen occurred in 4 participants in the levofloxacin group and in 8 participants in the placebo

155 rapy course, 10.8 percent of patients in the levofloxacin group had at least one febrile episode, as

156 chemotherapy, 3.5 percent of patients in the levofloxacin group had at least one febrile episode, as

157 e incidence of tuberculosis was lower in the levofloxacin group than in the placebo group at 30 month

158 es or deaths occurred in 489 patients in the levofloxacin group versus 134 (27%) in 488 patients in t

159 lates usually sensitive to quinolones in the levofloxacin group vs placebo (14/24 [58.3%] vs 15/45 [3

160 rade 2 tendonitis occurred in 1 child in the levofloxacin group.

161 (1%) of mostly reversible tendonitis in the levofloxacin group.

162 e of ATP was trovafloxacin > ciprofloxacin > levofloxacin > sparfloxacin.

163 ns: As part of a multidrug regimen, doses of levofloxacin >1,000 mg/d resulted in greater exposures a

164 s (minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] to levofloxacin, > or = 0.125 microg/mL) were identified.

165 For levofloxacin, >/=99.0% of strains were susceptible at </

166 estis CO92 and given a subinhibitory dose of levofloxacin had acute inflammation, edema, and masses o

167 Positive control mice (levofloxacin) had 100% survivorship in both neutropenic

168 Colistin sulfate and levofloxacin have a promising in vitro activity against

169 ciated with resistance to clarithromycin and levofloxacin have been defined, there are limited data r

170 eveloped population pharmacokinetic model of levofloxacin in children (0.2-16.8 years) was used and a

171 data support using targeted prophylaxis with levofloxacin in children undergoing induction chemothera

172 Major discrepancies occurred with levofloxacin in one strain (0.5%) by microdilution but w

173 actam led to better responses than high-dose levofloxacin in patients with complicated lower-urinary-

174 To determine the stability of levofloxacin in the two newer test systems (BACTEC 460 a

175 y transplant recipients, a 3-month course of levofloxacin initiated early following transplantation d

176 Prophylactic levofloxacin is effective regardless of age, PS, or tumo

177 stance to metronidazole, clarithromycin, and levofloxacin is more common among H. pylori isolates fro

178 Results show that levofloxacin is stable over the course of testing.

179 d for clarithromycin (k = 0.90012), good for levofloxacin (k = 0.78161) and fair for metronidazole (k

180 and gyrA (N87I/N87K/D91Y/D91N/D91G/D99N) for levofloxacin (kappa coefficient, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1

181 High-dose levofloxacin (L) (1,000 mg) was as active as moxifloxaci

182 Although preventive treatment with levofloxacin led to a lower incidence of tuberculosis th

183 providing a longer window for initiation of levofloxacin (LEVO) treatment (40 mg/kg).

184 cin (CLI), erythromycin (ERY), gatifloxacin, levofloxacin, linezolid, meropenem, penicillin (PEN), te

185 ), ethambutol (<=2.0), moxifloxacin (<=0.5), levofloxacin (<=1.0), amikacin (<=2.0), kanamycin (<=8.0

186 eatments (Group B, n = 51) and no history of levofloxacin (LVX) consumption were prescribed pantopraz

187 ug resistant TB therapy: moxifloxacin (MXF), levofloxacin (LVX) or gatifloxacin (GFX).

188 Levofloxacin may pose the least risk for uveitis compare

189 loxacin, gatifloxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, levofloxacin, meropenem, tobramycin, and trimethoprim-su

190 We confirmed that the new levofloxacin MIC breakpoints resulted in the highest cat

191 l), ceftriaxone (MIC90s, 0.5 microg/ml), and levofloxacin (MIC90s, < or =0.03 to 0.06 microg/ml).

192 Levofloxacin MICs resulted in a bimodal pattern with val

193 wide, and all patients colonized with FQREC (levofloxacin minimum inhibitory concentration, >/=8 mug/

194 Levofloxacin monotherapy selected for resistance to itse

195 t-discharge) fluoroquinolone (ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin) exposure was compared betwee

196 me-avibactam, chloramphenicol, delafloxacin, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, eravacycline, minocycline, o

197 findings were reported regarding the use of levofloxacin/moxifloxacin in the first-line treatment; t

198 ns with complete outcome data, ciprofloxacin/levofloxacin (n = 12), ciprofloxacin/levofloxacin combin

199 were treated with ciprofloxacin (n = 27) or levofloxacin (n = 29) at various predetermined time poin

200 We characterized 32 levofloxacin-nonsusceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae (LN

201 Neither the levofloxacin nor the ofloxacin disk yielded good separat

202 romycin of >0.25 mug/ml, and 16% had MICs to levofloxacin of >2 mug/ml.

203 Levofloxacin, oflaxacin, and perfloxacin were most likel

204 (TMP-SMX), fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, ofloxacin), and beta-lactams to treat UTI.

205 406%)-aztreonam, cefpodoxime, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, ofloxacin-and decreased for one drug: cefd

206 ploratory data support offering prophylactic levofloxacin on cycle 1 only of myelosuppressive cancer

207 of delaying treatment with ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin on efficacy.

208 every 8 h or intravenous high-dose (750 mg) levofloxacin once daily for 7 days.

209 andomly assigned to receive either 500 mg of levofloxacin once daily or matching placebo for seven da

210 al prostatitis is a minimum 4-week course of levofloxacin or ciprofloxacin.

211 CarboCell formulations of levofloxacin or clindamycin with or without antimicrobia

212 ultures showed that the strains resistant to levofloxacin or gatifloxacin were associated with higher

213 07 to 2010, who received intravenous or oral levofloxacin or moxifloxacin.

214 nteers, we confirmed the cross-reactivity of levofloxacin or ofloxacin with these opiate screening as

215 imen, and children in the household received levofloxacin or placebo once daily for 24 weeks.

216 At least 80% of the assigned doses of levofloxacin or placebo were received by 86% of the part

217 We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to levofloxacin or placebo with a computerised minimisation

218 uveitis cases, current use of moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, or ciprofloxacin hydrochloride was compare

219 r rifampin, 97.6% for quinolones (ofloxacin, levofloxacin, or moxifloxacin), 99.2% for amikacin, 99.2

220 to clindamycin, tetracycline, erythromycin, levofloxacin, or mupirocin was detected in a large propo

221 d, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of levofloxacin (P = .01).

222 Meropenem and levofloxacin penetrations into epithelial lining fluid w

223 nd randomly assigned 977 patients to receive levofloxacin prophylaxis (489 patients) or placebo (488

224 Levofloxacin prophylaxis alone reduced these infections,

225 Levofloxacin prophylaxis also minimized the use of treat

226 ts; of these participants, 31 (63%) received levofloxacin prophylaxis during induction therapy and 18

227 All patients received levofloxacin prophylaxis during neutropenia.

228 Levofloxacin prophylaxis of tuberculosis in liver transp

229 ts, 173 received no prophylaxis, 69 received levofloxacin prophylaxis, and 102 received other prophyl

230 mes in patients who received no prophylaxis, levofloxacin prophylaxis, or other prophylaxis during in

231 Additionally, bilosome formulated levofloxacin protected mice from antibiotic and infectio

232 The combination of levofloxacin-PZA-ethambutol had intermediate bactericida

233 ased over the course of induction therapy in levofloxacin recipients (mean prevalence 10.4% [95% CI 3

234 tumors or lymphoma, the prophylactic use of levofloxacin reduces the incidence of fever, probable in

235 in was acceptable, but minor error rates for levofloxacin remained outside the acceptance range (i.e.

236 Levofloxacin, representative of an important class of fl

237 illin resistance in 10/531 (2%) persons, and levofloxacin resistance in 30/155 (19%) persons; no tetr

238 Levofloxacin resistance increased from 14.3% (2005) to 5

239 alence of metronidazole, clarithromycin, and levofloxacin resistance varied by region.

240 When tested against MSSA, levofloxacin resistance was higher among isolates from p

241 Additional data on pyrazinamide and levofloxacin resistance were available from 6 countries

242 WGS for the detection of clarithromycin and levofloxacin resistance.

243 with high levels of dual clarithromycin and levofloxacin resistance.

244 Seventy-eight (96.3%) of the 81 levofloxacin-resistant isolates analyzed possessed multi

245 y tests with a subset of pan-susceptible and levofloxacin-resistant isolates validated the selected t

246 isolates and approximately one-third of the levofloxacin-resistant isolates were multidrug resistant

247 ominant clone with a significant increase in levofloxacin-resistant isolates.

248 The levofloxacin-resistant strains either were isolated from

249 3,133 erythromycin-resistant strains and 81 levofloxacin-resistant strains, were collected from 206

250 e strains while permitting the growth of all levofloxacin-resistant strains.

251 Treatment with intravenous followed by oral levofloxacin resulted in cure.

252 bly determined resistance to clarithromycin, levofloxacin, rifabutin, and tetracycline from clinical

253 evalence of resistance to clarithromycin and levofloxacin rose significantly over time during the per

254 9.0]; specificity 96.6% [95% CI 95.2-97.9]), levofloxacin (sensitivity 94.8% [93.3-97.6]; specificity

255 Ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin susceptibility for all tested pathogens was

256 Levofloxacin susceptibility was determined by broth micr

257 Next, optimum levofloxacin test concentrations were determined for AP,

258 ive antibiotics, amoxicillin, metronidazole, levofloxacin, tetracyclin, and clarithromycin, commonly

259 amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole, levofloxacin, tetracycline, and rifabutin using agar dil

260 Levofloxacin, the active l-isomer of the quinolone oflox

261 For levofloxacin, the CA was 72.4%, with 0 VME, 0 ME, and 16

262 57 (93%) of 61 isolates were susceptible to levofloxacin (third-generation fluoroquinolone).

263 Only 3 isolates were resistant to levofloxacin, TMP-SMZ, and minocycline.

264 Addition of prophylactic levofloxacin to active myeloma treatment during the firs

265 These findings do not support the use of levofloxacin to prevent posttransplant BK virus infectio

266 lonize inside the gastrointestinal tracts of levofloxacin-treated rats, which significantly reduced a

267 er fever onset, 10 days of ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin treatment remained very effective (90 or 10

268 Azithromycin vs. levofloxacin treatment was associated with lower relativ

269 Meropenem plus levofloxacin treatment was shown to be a promising combi

270 associated diarrhea (AAD) resulting from the levofloxacin-treatment and improved some of the pre-infl

271 apies should be bismuth quadruple therapy or levofloxacin triple therapy, depending on suspected resi

272 Patients were given 500 mg of levofloxacin (two 250 mg tablets), orally once daily for

273 -generation fluoroquinolone (moxifloxacin or levofloxacin) use and patient mortality, adjusting for r

274 immune diseases, infections, specific drugs (levofloxacin, ustekinumab), and malignancy.

275 ast, susceptibility rates to clindamycin and levofloxacin varied from 94.0% and 60.7% (aged 6-17 year

276 Levofloxacin was administered as an infusion of 500 mg/h

277 Levofloxacin was associated with an increased risk of ad

278 A 10-day sequential regimen that contains levofloxacin was efficient, safe, and cost saving in era

279 zed trial data, the prophylactic efficacy of levofloxacin was examined for the same subgroups.

280 In contrast, amikacin plus levofloxacin was found to be antagonistic in time-kill s

281 Treatment with ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin was initiated from 0 to up to 30 hours afte

282 atom in benzene ring attached to fluorine of levofloxacin was investigated by C K-edge X-ray absorpti

283 Susceptibility testing for levofloxacin was performed by Etest.

284 If used, prophylaxis with levofloxacin was recommended during severe neutropenia.

285 Exposure to levofloxacin was significantly associated with successfu

286 on data from 2 randomized controlled trials, levofloxacin was strongly recommended by the World Healt

287 The combination of meropenem plus levofloxacin was synergistic, producing good bacterial k

288 Levofloxacin was used in the subsequent 5 cases, with re

289 A PK curve for an approved antibiotic, levofloxacin, was generated to show utility beyond the f

290 sted ORs for azithromycin, moxifloxacin, and levofloxacin were 2.62 (95% CI, 1.69-4.06), 2.31 (95% CI

291 Meropenem and levofloxacin were administered to partially humanize the

292 The microbiomes of mice treated with levofloxacin were depleted of all phyla with the excepti

293 Ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin were found to be >90% efficacious.

294 ance rates to erythromycin, clindamycin, and levofloxacin were higher in the population aged >/= 65 y

295 whereas resistance rates to clindamycin and levofloxacin were lowest among isolates from patients ag

296 for ciprofloxacin (19.0%) and 20 (34.5%) for levofloxacin were observed.

297 0), media containing subinhibitory levels of levofloxacin were prepared and stored at 4 and 37 degree

298 ing regimen by weight band was developed for levofloxacin when used as TPT in people aged 0-19 years

299 ant association of current first-time use of levofloxacin with uveitis could not be identified.

300 eneration of PPIs and use of moxifloxacin or levofloxacin within triple therapy as second-line treatm