ライフサイエンスコーパス: piperacillin

1 e CD27 expression when cultured with soluble piperacillin.

2 than an equivalent amount of tazobactam and piperacillin.

3 ia between 2001 and 2010 who were prescribed piperacillin.

4 (5 of 127 isolates, 3.9%), pseudomonas with piperacillin (1 of 28, 3.6%), coagulase-negative staphyl

5 ations (6.7-fold for meropenem, 3.8-fold for piperacillin, 10.5-fold for tazobactam, 1.9-fold for van

6 Patients received piperacillin, 50 mg/kg of body weight intravenously ever

7 d target concentrations for meropenem (89%), piperacillin (83%), and vancomycin (60%) against suscept

8 The MIC values of 24 in combination with piperacillin against class A and class C producing organ

9 SI recommendation to lower the breakpoint of piperacillin against P. aeruginosa to </=16 microg/mL.

10 ype veronii strains were 100% susceptible to piperacillin and 100% resistant to ticarcillin.

11 e patients taking the beta-lactam antibiotic piperacillin and the threshold required for T cell activ

12 A. jandaei displayed resistance to piperacillin and ticarcillin in 53 and 71% of the isolat

13 hrough October 2016 using ["vancomycin" and "piperacillin" and "tazobactam"] and ["AKI" or "acute ren

14 hrough October 2016 using ["vancomycin" and "piperacillin" and "tazobactam"] and ["AKI" or "acute ren

15 7 muM for meropenem, and 7.1 +/- 0.6 muM for piperacillin) and in urine (LODs: 36.6 +/- 11.0 muM for

16 Minocycline, imipenem, meropenem, piperacillin, and piperacillin-tazobactam were the most

17 escribing the pharmacokinetics of meropenem, piperacillin, and vancomycin in critically ill patients

18 ent groups involved in studies of meropenem, piperacillin, and vancomycin were 55.3, 60.3, and 56.9 y

19 f PBP3 with cephalexin, but not aztreonam or piperacillin, appeared to be stimulated by cell division

20 o and in vivo activities in combination with piperacillin are discussed.

21 The objective of this study was to use piperacillin as a model of beta-lactam hypersensitivity

22 ral administration of beta-lactamase reduced piperacillin-associated alteration of the indigenous mic

23 A piperacillin-BSA adduct was used as an antigen in ELISA

24 A piperacillin-BSA adduct with cyclized and hydrolysed for

25 ding was detected with antigens generated at piperacillin/BSA ratios of 10:1 and above, which corresp

26 ly resistant PA was defined by resistance to piperacillin, ceftazidime, imipenem, and FQ.

27 d by the resistance to two antibiotics among piperacillin, ceftazidime, imipenem, colistine, and fluo

28 cells from healthy volunteers were primed to piperacillin, cloned, and subjected to the similar analy

29 ersus 94.1% of patients receiving tobramycin-piperacillin; difference, 2.1 percentage points [CI, -2.

30 The present study suggests that piperacillin drug monitoring might be necessary in the s

31 e would inactivate the portion of parenteral piperacillin excreted into the intestinal tract, preserv

32 illin is as safe and effective as tobramycin-piperacillin for empirical therapy of neutropenic fever.

33 tests were noted primarily with cefepime and piperacillin, for which the BMD results were typically m

34 (63 of 234 febrile episodes) and tobramycin-piperacillin group (52 of 237 episodes) were similar (27

35 Success rates in the ciprofloxacin-piperacillin group (63 of 234 febrile episodes) and tobr

36 inically evaluable (234 in the ciprofloxacin-piperacillin group and 237 in the tobramycin-piperacilli

37 ing for 67% of failures in the ciprofloxacin-piperacillin group and 72% in the tobramycin-piperacilli

38 piperacillin group and 237 in the tobramycin-piperacillin group).

39 piperacillin group and 72% in the tobramycin-piperacillin group; difference, 5.0 percentage points [C

40 A hydrolyzed piperacillin hapten was detected on four lysine residues

41 t proteins modified to different levels with piperacillin haptens.

42 Piperacillin-HSA conjugates that had levels and epitopes

43 To conclude, the levels of piperacillin-HSA modification that activated T cells are

44 l clones (n = 570, 84% CD4(+)) from blood of piperacillin-hypersensitive patients proliferated and se

45 mphocytes and T lymphocytes are activated in piperacillin-hypersensitive patients.

46 Thus, the aim of this study was to utilize piperacillin hypersensitivity as an exemplar to (i) deve

47 The combinations examined included cefoxitin-piperacillin, imipenem-cefotaxime, imipenem-ceftazidime,

48 shock, that is, moxifloxacin, meropenem, and piperacillin in aqueous solution and human urine.

49 We aimed to compare pharmacokinetics of piperacillin in severely obese and nonobese patients wit

50 ree beta-lactams (cephalexin, aztreonam, and piperacillin) in growing cells.

51 le and piperacillin-tazobactam intermediate; piperacillin intermediate and piperacillin-tazobactam re

52 Ciprofloxacin-piperacillin is as safe and effective as tobramycin-pipe

53 cillin than in patients receiving tobramycin-piperacillin (mean, 5 vs. 6 days) (P = 0.005).

54 mortality was 9% and 24% in children with a piperacillin MIC of </=16 microg/mL and of 32-64 microg/

55 herapeutic choices should be considered when piperacillin MICs against P. aeruginosa are >/=32 microg

56 Our finding that elevated piperacillin MICs are associated with higher mortality i

57 One hundred twenty-four (72%) children had piperacillin MICs of </=16 microg/mL and 46 (28%) childr

58 of </=16 microg/mL and 46 (28%) children had piperacillin MICs of 32-64 microg/mL.

59 stics and clinical outcomes of children with piperacillin minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of

60 Subcutaneous piperacillin or piperacillin plus oral beta-lactamase we

61 isolates were susceptible by both methods to piperacillin, piperacillin-tazobactam, ampicillin-sulbac

62 tes, correlation coefficients (r values) for piperacillin, piperacillin-tazobactam, and meropenem wer

63 Unbound piperacillin plasma concentration and fractional time of

64 Piperacillin plasma concentration was measured every 12

65 ve a statistically significant difference in piperacillin plasma concentrations over time between gro

66 obese patients experienced potentially toxic piperacillin plasma concentrations.

67 Subcutaneous piperacillin or piperacillin plus oral beta-lactamase were administered

68 for moxifloxacin, and 114.8 +/- 3.1 muM for piperacillin) points toward the potential of UV Raman sp

69 Piperacillin-primed naive T cells from healthy volunteer

70 24 and 12 h before orogastric inoculation of piperacillin-resistant pathogens.

71 Surprisingly, piperacillin-resistant transformants contained no altera

72 Piperacillin-responsive skin-homing CD4(+) clones expres

73 earance for meropenem (rs = 0.43; p = 0.12), piperacillin (rs = 0.77; p = 0.10), and vancomycin (rs =

74 dults, the combination of IV vancomycin plus piperacillin sodium/tazobactam sodium is associated with

75 LSI) recently elected to adjust the previous piperacillin susceptibility breakpoint of </=64 microg/m

76 Unprecedented phenotypes (piperacillin susceptible and piperacillin-tazobactam int

77 diate and piperacillin-tazobactam resistant; piperacillin susceptible and piperacillin-tazobactam res

78 ility to piperacillin was similar to that to piperacillin-tazobactam (<1% difference) for 6,938 isola

79 of very major (false-susceptible) errors for piperacillin-tazobactam (19 to 27%).

80 ftriaxone (825, 10.8%; 95% CI, 10.1%-11.5%), piperacillin-tazobactam (788, 10.3%; 95% CI, 9.6%-11.0%)

81 rvention groups had decreased broad-spectrum piperacillin-tazobactam (control 56 hours, rmPCR 44 hour

82 A series of cases of piperacillin-tazobactam (P/T)-associated neutropenia has

83 GNB infection at low risk for resistance to piperacillin-tazobactam (PT), cefepime (CE), and meropen

84 The effectiveness of piperacillin-tazobactam (PTZ) for the treatment of exten

85 Piperacillin-tazobactam (PTZ) is known to cause false-po

86 peracillin (VM error, 5.7%; m error, 13.5%), piperacillin-tazobactam (VM error, 9.3%; m error, 12.9%)

87 (AKI) among patients receiving vancomycin + piperacillin-tazobactam (VPT) compared to similar patien

88 loxacin (400 mg q24 hours) or comparator (IV piperacillin-tazobactam [3.0/0.375 g q6 hours] +/- PO am

89 BLBLI (amoxicillin-clavulanic acid [AMC] and piperacillin-tazobactam [PTZ]) or carbapenem were compar

90 thoprim-sulfamethoxazole, ciprofloxacin, and piperacillin-tazobactam also showed reasonable activity;

91 She was treated with piperacillin-tazobactam and azithromycin and rapidly imp

92 Both piperacillin-tazobactam and ceftriaxone inhibited coloni

93 f broad-spectrum antimicrobial drugs such as piperacillin-tazobactam and drugs such as vancomycin for

94 Since this property of piperacillin-tazobactam and galactomannan ELISA is not w

95 The patient was treated with piperacillin-tazobactam and gentamicin.

96 d performance was noted for the reformulated piperacillin-tazobactam and imipenem found on the AST-GN

97 stematic biases toward false susceptibility (piperacillin-tazobactam and imipenem) and others toward

98 pneumonia (VAP) who received clindamycin and piperacillin-tazobactam as part of their treatment regim

99 We compared ceftriaxone and piperacillin-tazobactam at doses ranging from 0.1 to 2 t

100 antigen in vitro, that in animals receiving piperacillin-tazobactam circulating galactomannan antige

101 nly used in immunocompromised patients, only piperacillin-tazobactam contains significant amounts of

102 modify pharmacokinetics of antibiotics, but piperacillin-tazobactam continuous IV infusion pharmacok

103 penems exhibited reliable activity, although piperacillin-tazobactam did not.

104 e beta-lactamase gene was observed following piperacillin-tazobactam exposure and only in those strai

105 commonly used in immunocompromised patients, piperacillin-tazobactam expressed a distinctively high l

106 rom 2001 to 2004, that compared ertapenem to piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of moderate-to

107 Five (38.5%) of thirteen patients receiving piperacillin-tazobactam had serum GMI values > 0.5 compa

108 Patients (n = 13) receiving piperacillin-tazobactam had significantly greater mean s

109 rbapenems in Klebsiella species) to 3.0 (for piperacillin-tazobactam in P. aeruginosa and Enterobacte

110 creased from 16% in 2006 to 31% in 2010, and piperacillin-tazobactam increased from 16% to 27%, and t

111 receiving vancomycin, receipt of concomitant piperacillin-tazobactam increases the risk of nephrotoxi

112 were treated with 16 g/2 g/24 hr continuous piperacillin-tazobactam infusion.

113 t doses at least 0.5 times the HEDD, whereas piperacillin-tazobactam inhibited colonization at doses

114 ted phenotypes (piperacillin susceptible and piperacillin-tazobactam intermediate; piperacillin inter

115 After intravenous infusion of piperacillin-tazobactam into rabbits, the serum galactom

116 Repeated administration of piperacillin-tazobactam over 7 days resulted in accumula

117 at doses up to 0.25 times the HEDD, whereas piperacillin-tazobactam promoted colonization at doses u

118 Of all of the combinations, imipenem/piperacillin-tazobactam provided the greatest sensitivit

119 ctam resistant; piperacillin susceptible and piperacillin-tazobactam resistant) accounted for 6.1% of

120 intermediate; piperacillin intermediate and piperacillin-tazobactam resistant; piperacillin suscepti

121 scharged home, where he completed 4 weeks of piperacillin-tazobactam therapy.

122 pecies, in contrast, susceptibility rates to piperacillin-tazobactam were 5.9 to 13.9% higher than to

123 Ertapenem and piperacillin-tazobactam were each active against >98% of

124 line, imipenem, meropenem, piperacillin, and piperacillin-tazobactam were the most active since 51, 5

125 ent case reports describe patients receiving piperacillin-tazobactam who were found to have circulati

126 ly being prescribed (cefepime, meropenem, or piperacillin-tazobactam) or had a positive culture isola

127 78%; cephalosporins, 31%; trimethoprim, 20%; piperacillin-tazobactam, 11%; chloramphenicol, 9%; and a

128 ftazidime, 128 microg/ml versus 2 microg/ml; piperacillin-tazobactam, 256 microg/ml versus 4 microg/m

129 ); trimethoprim, 45% (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.74); piperacillin-tazobactam, 42% (95% CI, 0.20 to 0.71); and

130 ancomycin, cefoxitin, ceftriaxone, cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, ampicillin, oxacillin, gentamic

131 susceptible by both methods to piperacillin, piperacillin-tazobactam, ampicillin-sulbactam, ticarcill

132 m-cefotaxime, imipenem-ceftazidime, imipenem-piperacillin-tazobactam, and imipenem-cefoxitin.

133 on coefficients (r values) for piperacillin, piperacillin-tazobactam, and meropenem were <0.80.

134 d P. aeruginosa in bottles with cefepime and piperacillin-tazobactam, but the PF system recovered bac

135 axime, and cefepime, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, piperacillin-tazobactam, cefepime, and gentamicin, Neiss

136 e data for the use of cephamycins, cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, ceftolozane-tazobactam, and cef

137 Susceptibilities to piperacillin-tazobactam, imipenem, meropenem, and trovaf

138 infusion versus intermittent bolus dosing of piperacillin-tazobactam, meropenem, and ticarcillin-clav

139 Participants commenced on piperacillin-tazobactam, ticarcillin-clavulanate, or mer

140 Subcutaneous vancomycin, clindamycin, piperacillin-tazobactam, ticarcillin-clavulanic acid, me

141 reonam, cefepime, ceftazidime, imipenem, and piperacillin-tazobactam, were tested.

142 Piperacillin-tazobactam, which has antienterococcal acti

143 imipenem; and 50 and 50%, respectively, for piperacillin-tazobactam.

144 state by the third day of administration of piperacillin-tazobactam.

145 300) expressed resistance to ceftazidime and piperacillin-tazobactam.

146 e to ceftazidime but remained susceptible to piperacillin-tazobactam.

147 SI, even in patients receiving perioperative piperacillin-tazobactam.

148 sure ranged from 1.4 for colistin to 4.9 for piperacillin-tazobactam.

149 cteria only in bottles with trough levels of piperacillin-tazobactam.

150 apy was as least as effective as standard IV piperacillin-tazobactam/PO amoxicillin-clavulanate dosed

151 intravenous ertapenem (1 g daily; n=295) or piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g every 6 h; n=291) given

152 of resistance to cefepime (29.0% vs. 7.0%), piperacillin/tazobactam (31.9% vs. 11.5%), carbapenems (

153 lignancies were randomly assigned to receive piperacillin/tazobactam (4.5 g intravenously every 8 hou

154 received ertapenem and the 219 who received piperacillin/tazobactam (94%vs 92%, respectively; betwee

155 otics that have a high risk for CDI during a piperacillin/tazobactam (PIP/TAZO) shortage and hospital

156 f ertapenem 1 g once a day was equivalent to piperacillin/tazobactam 3.375 g every 6 hours in the tre

157 g every 12 hrs, ceftazidime 2 g every 8 hrs, piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g every 6 hrs and 3.375 g ev

158 afe, well tolerated, and more effective than piperacillin/tazobactam alone in febrile, high-risk, neu

159 The combination of piperacillin/tazobactam and tigecycline is safe, well to

160 re the safety and efficacy of ertapenem with piperacillin/tazobactam as therapy following adequate su

161 phrotoxins, and hospital, IV vancomycin plus piperacillin/tazobactam combination therapy was associat

162 ents (11.7%) who received IV vancomycin plus piperacillin/tazobactam combination therapy.

163 ded or continuous infusion of carbapenems or piperacillin/tazobactam compared to those receiving shor

164 the efficacy and safety of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for foot infections.

165 eus, a second drug was added (ceftazidime or piperacillin/tazobactam for P. aeruginosa and vancomycin

166 cefepime, ceftazidime (2 g every 8 hrs), and piperacillin/tazobactam have high probabilities of achie

167 Concomitant vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam may be associated with increased

168 Coadministration of IV vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam may increase the risk of AKI in

169 etween AKI and receipt of IV vancomycin plus piperacillin/tazobactam or vancomycin plus 1 other antip

170 ncreased AKI with concomitant vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam should be considered when determ

171 h exposure arm, the use of ciprofloxacin and piperacillin/tazobactam was 51% and 75% higher than in t

172 Concomitant vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam was associated with AKI in unadj

173 ded or continuous infusion of carbapenems or piperacillin/tazobactam was associated with lower mortal

174 18.4), 105.0 (74.4-204.0)/3.8 (3.4-21.8) for piperacillin/tazobactam, 12.0 (9.8-16.0) for vancomycin,

175 Other antibiotics, such as meropenem, piperacillin/tazobactam, and cefuroxime, were not associ

176 imipenem-cilastatin, ceftazidime, cefepime, piperacillin/tazobactam, and ciprofloxacin.

177 quivalent to those for patients treated with piperacillin/tazobactam, suggesting that this once-daily

178 rbapenems in >90% of cases; however, against piperacillin/tazobactam, susceptibility was identified i

179 icity with the combination of vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam, the "workhorse" regimen at many

180 at include specific antibiotics (vancomycin, piperacillin/tazobactam, tobramycin) further appear to c

181 ynamic (PK/PD) properties of carbapenems and piperacillin/tazobactam, when the duration of infusion i

182 a similar safety and tolerability profile to piperacillin/tazobactam.

183 ured, as were 232 of 304 (76.2) treated with piperacillin/tazobactam.

184 as were 157 of the 193 (81.2%) treated with piperacillin/tazobactam.

185 injury (AKI) compared to vancomycin without piperacillin/tazobactam.

186 ibed empiric antibiotics were vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam.

187 (20-60 minutes) infusions of carbapenems or piperacillin/tazobactam.

188 d faster in patients receiving ciprofloxacin-piperacillin than in patients receiving tobramycin-piper

189 In combination with piperacillin, their in vitro activities enhanced suscept

190 dren with P. aeruginosa bacteremia receiving piperacillin therapy who met inclusion criteria.

191 ntrations of the beta-lactams cephalexin and piperacillin to specifically inhibit FtsI (PBP3), an enz

192 lity would expose the critically ill to both piperacillin under and overdosing.

193 likely than nonobese patients to experience piperacillin underdosing when facing high minimal inhibi

194 -tazobactam were 5.9 to 13.9% higher than to piperacillin using disk diffusion, MicroScan, and Vitek

195 l (96.2% of patients receiving ciprofloxacin-piperacillin versus 94.1% of patients receiving tobramyc

196 am (VM error, 9.8%; minor [m] error, 16.1%), piperacillin (VM error, 5.7%; m error, 13.5%), piperacil

197 LN-1-255 combined with piperacillin was more potent against Escherichia coli DH

198 Susceptibility to piperacillin was similar to that to piperacillin-tazobac

199 MICs for aztreonam and piperacillin were higher, with MICs for some strains of