Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Cefdinir”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMed2000

Comparison of cefdinir and penicillin V in the treatment of pediatric streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis.

BACKGROUND: Group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal (GABHS) tonsillopharyngitis continues to be a prevalent pediatric infectious disease that requires prompt treatment for relief of symptoms and to prevent complications. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy/tolerability of cefdinir and penicillin V in the treatment of pediatric GABHS tonsillopharyngitis as demonstrated in two clinical trials of similar design. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, investigator-blinded trials. PATIENTS: Children < or =12 years of age with sore throat, pharyngeal erythema and positive rapid streptococcal antigen test results. INTERVENTION: In Study A patients took cefdinir 7 mg/kg twice daily or 14 mg/kg once daily or penicillin V 10 mg/kg 4 times daily (all regimens for 10 days). In Study B patients took cefdinir 7 mg/kg twice daily for 5 days or penicillin V 10 mg/kg 4 times daily for 10 days. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical and microbiologic evaluations were conducted at multiple times during and after therapy. RESULTS: Of 1274 patients 1122 were evaluable (679 patients received cefdinir; 443 received penicillin V). Clinical cure and microbiologic eradication rates were superior in the combined cefdinir treatment groups (94.9 and 92.7%, respectively), whether given once or twice daily for 10 days or twice daily for 5 days, compared with the penicillin treatment group (88.5 and 70.9%, respectively; P<0.001 for both). Adverse event rates were comparable in the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Cefdinir is a reliable and well-tolerated drug for the management of GABHS tonsillopharyngitis in children.

Cefdinir↗
PubMed2006

Cefdinir pharmacokinetics and tolerability in children receiving 25 mg/kg once daily.

BACKGROUND: Of several oral cephalosporins, cefdinir is recommended as an alternative therapy for children with acute otitis media who have type 1 hypersensitivity to beta-lactams. Because the current cefdinir dosage of 14 mg/kg/d is approved for treatment of acute otitis media caused by penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae, we hypothesized that a 25-mg/kg dose given daily would be more effective for nonsusceptible S. pneumoniae. METHODS: We performed pharmacokinetic analyses on 37 infants and children who were given cefdinir in dosages of 14 or 25 mg/kg once daily for 10 days, for the treatment of respiratory and skin or skin structure infections. Cefdinir plasma concentrations were determined with validated liquid chromatology, and pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were determined in relation to the minimum inhibitory concentration values of S. pneumoniae. RESULTS: The maximal plasma concentrations and area-under-the-curve values were significantly higher after the 25-mg/kg in relation to the minimum inhibitory concentration values for S. pneumoniae strains. The pharmacodynamics measure of bacteriologic effectiveness was <40% of the dosing interval (ie, 24 hours), indicating that many of the penicillin-nonsusceptible S. pneumoniae causing acute otitis media would not be effectively treated. Diarrhea occurred in 20% of the 39 subjects that received the larger dosage of cefdinir. CONCLUSION: A cefdinir dosage of 25 mg/kg daily would be ineffective for treatment of acute otitis media caused by penicillin-nonsusceptible S. pneumoniae strain.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1993

Intestinal brush-border transport of the oral cephalosporin antibiotic, cefdinir, mediated by dipeptide and monocarboxylic acid transport systems in rabbits.

Intestinal absorption of the orally active cephalosporin, cefdinir, was investigated using brush-border membrane vesicles prepared from rabbit small intestine. The initial uptake of cefdinir was pH-dependent, with increased uptake at acidic pH, and was not influenced by either sodium gradient or membrane potential difference. Cefdinir uptake was saturable with an apparent Michaelis constant of 8.1 mM. Initial uptake of cefdinir was inhibited by dipeptides (glycyl-L-proline and glycylsarcosine), beta-lactam antibiotics (cephradine, cefixime and penicillin V), and monocarboxylic acids (acetic acid and L-lactic acid), whereas the uptake of cephradine and cefixime was not inhibited by monocarboxylic acids. Cefdinir significantly inhibited the initial uptake of cephradine, cefixime and [3H]acetic acid. From these results, it was suggested that cefdinir was transported across brush-border membranes by both dipeptide and monocarboxylic acid carriers.

Acetates↗
PubMed1995

Suction-induced blister fluid penetration of cefdinir in healthy volunteers following ascending oral doses.

The pharmacokinetics and suction-induced blister fluid penetration of cefdinir following single oral administrations of 200, 300, 400, and 600 mg were studied in 16 healthy young male volunteers according to a Latin square design. Plasma, blister, and urine samples were assayed by high-pressure liquid chromatography. We observed a nonlinear relationship (P = 0.02) between the dose and the maximum concentration in plasma as well as between the dose and the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) in plasma (P < 0.001), which may be indicative of a limited absorption process. This resulted in a lower AUC value than expected as well as a smaller fraction of cefdinir excreted unchanged at a dose of 600 mg. Renal clearance decreased with increasing doses (P < 0.006; analysis of variance with the Latin square design and Games-Howell procedure). Maximal cefdinir concentrations in blister fluid were delayed compared with concentrations in plasma. Blister fluid penetration measured by the ratio of the AUC in blister fluid to the AUC in plasma was extensive (92.4 to 108.4%). Cefdinir concentrations in blister fluid remained equal to or higher than the concentrations in plasma from 6 to 12 h following cefdinir administration. On the basis of the concentrations in blister fluid and the in vitro MIC data, we estimated that cefdinir at 200 to 400 mg administered twice daily would be adequate to treat uncomplicated skin infections caused by Streptococcus pyogenes. Seven volunteers experienced episodes of light-to-moderate diarrhea. These adverse events occurred irrespective of dose.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Comparison of cefdinir and cefaclor in treatment of community-acquired pneumonia.

Six hundred ninety patients were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial comparing the efficacy and safety of cefdinir with those of cefaclor in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. Patients received either 10 days of treatment with cefdinir (n = 347) at 300 mg twice daily or 10 days of treatment with cefaclor (n = 343) at 500 mg three times daily. Microbiological assessments were performed on sputum specimens obtained at admission and at the two posttherapy visits, if available. Respiratory tract pathogens were isolated from 538 (78%) of 690 patient admission sputum specimens, with the predominant pathogens being Haemophilus parainfluenzae, Haemophilus influenzae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Staphylococcus aureus. The microbiological eradication rates at the test-of-cure visit were 92% (238 of 260 pathogens) and 93% (245 of 264 pathogens) for the evaluable patients treated with cefdinir and cefaclor, respectively. A satisfactory clinical response (cure plus improvement) was achieved in 89% (166 of 187) and 86% (160 of 186) of the evaluable patients treated with cefdinir and cefaclor, respectively. Except for the incidence of diarrhea, adverse event rates while on treatment were equivalent between the two treatment groups. Diarrhea incidence during therapy was higher for patients treated with cefdinir (13.7%) than for patients treated with cefaclor (5.3%). These results indicate that cefdinir is effective and safe in the treatment of patients with pneumonia.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Pharmacokinetic study of an oral cephalosporin, cefdinir, in hemodialysis patients.

The pharmacokinetics of cefdinir were investigated in six hemodialysis patients. For the present study, two tests were carried out, one with 4 h of hemodialysis and the other without hemodialysis. Cefdinir was given orally to each patient in a dose of 100 mg, and blood was collected serially for 48 h after dosing in the test without dialysis and for 72 h in the test with dialysis. In the test without dialysis, the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was 2.36 +/- 0.53 micrograms/ml (mean +/- standard deviation) and the time to Cmax was 9.00 +/- 2.45 h. The terminal elimination half-life (t1/2) and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) were 16.95 +/- 1.20 h and 69.05 +/- 14.84 micrograms.h/ml, respectively. In the test with dialysis, t1/2 during hemodialysis decreased approximately to one-sixth of that obtained in the test without dialysis, although t1/2 in the latter elimination phase did not differ from that in the nondialysis test. AUC was reduced to 43% of that in the test without dialysis. The fractional removal of cefdinir by hemodialysis was 61%. These findings indicate that clearance of cefdinir is prolonged in patients with renal failure, and cefdinir is well removed by introduction of hemodialysis, although t1/2 (during hemodialysis) and AUC were two and eight times higher than the data previously reported for healthy volunteers, respectively. The pharmacokinetic data suggest that 100 mg of oral cefdinir once a day would result in a sufficient concentration in plasma in hemodialysis patients, but this remains to be confirmed by multiple-dose studies.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Morphological alterations of Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes exposed to cefdinir, a new oral broad-spectrum cephalosporin.

Affinity for penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs) and the morphological alteration of Staphylococcus aureus 209-P JC and Streptococcus pyogenes C-203 exposed to cefdinir were studied. Although cefdinir was bactericidal against both strains, the extent of the decrease in colony-forming units (CFU) was similar in a fairly wide range of concentrations. Transmission electron microscopy of S. aureus 209-P JC revealed that cefdinir induced thickening of the cross wall and frequent cell lysis at low concentrations. The lytic sites were seen at the site of septum formation. In S. pyogenes C-203, cefdinir induced thickening of the peripheral wall and cross wall, and protoplast-like cells were observed during the incubation period. Cefdinir showed high affinity for all PBPs of S. aureus 209-P JC and S. pyogenes C-203. The drastic changes in the morphology of S. aureus and S. pyogenes were caused by binding of cefdinir to all PBPs.

Bacterial Proteins↗
PubMed2006

The efficacy of cefdinir in acute bacterial rhinosinusitis.

Acute bacterial rhinosinusitis is a common infection resulting in substantial morbidity. Cefdinir, an oral cephalosporin, has extended-spectrum, bactericidal activity against common acute bacterial rhinosinusitis pathogens, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis. Cefdinir shows rapid oral absorption and good respiratory tissue penetration, and may be administered once daily. In randomised clinical trials, cefdinir showed efficacy similar to that of other recommended regimens in the treatment of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis, namely amoxicillin/clavulanate and levofloxacin. Cefdinir is well tolerated and has shown a low propensity to suppress the normal commensal flora. Cefdinir oral suspension is rated highly by children in terms of its taste and smell. As the only once-daily beta-lactam currently recommended by acute bacterial rhinosinusitis guidelines (for first-line use in patients with mild acute bacterial rhinosinusitis and no recent antibacterial use), cefdinir offers a convenient and attractive treatment option.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2004

Parent-reported outcomes for treatment of acute otitis media with cefdinir or amoxicillin/clavulanate oral suspensions.

OBJECTIVE: To compare parent-reported outcomes (satisfaction, tolerability, compliance, and work/daycare missed) for children (aged 6 months to 6 years) receiving either cefdinir or amoxicillin/clavulanate for acute otitis media. METHOD: In a phase IV, investigator-blinded, parallel-group, randomized, multicenter study, parents or legal guardians were asked to complete the Otitis Parent Questionnaire (OPQ) 12-14 days after the first dose of cefdinir or amoxicillin/clavulanate oral suspensions. Responses in each of the outcome domains were analyzed using non-parametric statistical analysis. RESULTS: Of 367 parents/guardians who completed the questionnaire, better ease of use (p = 0.009) and taste (p < 0.0001) were associated with cefdinir versus amoxicillin/clavulanate treatment, and children were significantly more likely to experience vomiting with amoxicillin/clavulanate (16% vs 8%; p = 0.016). Parents also reported that their children were much more likely to take all of their medication if receiving cefdinir (68% vs 53% for amoxicillin/clavulanate; p = 0.005). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in work/daycare missed. CONCLUSION: Based on parents' assessment using the OPQ, cefdinir was easier to administer and tasted better than amoxicillin/clavulanate. Children who received cefdinir also experienced less vomiting and had greater compliance than children who received amoxicillin/clavulanate.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2000

A comparison of a five-day regimen of cefdinir with a seven-day regimen of loracarbef for the treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis.

To compare the efficacy and safety of five-day cefdinir treatment with seven-day loracarbef treatment in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis, 586 patients were enrolled in a multicentre, randomised, double-blind trial. Patients received either five days of treatment with cefdinir (n = 291) at 300 mg twice daily or seven days of treatment with loracarbef (n = 295) at 400 mg twice daily. Microbiological assessments were done on sputum specimens obtained at admission and at the two post-therapy visits, if available. The clinical cure rates were 86% (138/160) and 85% (141/166) for the evaluable patients treated with cefdinir and loracarbef, respectively. Respiratory tract pathogens were isolated from 457 (78%) of 586 admission sputum specimens, with the predominant pathogens being Haemophilus parainfluenzae, H. influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis and Staphylococcus aureus. The microbiological eradication rates at the test-of-cure visit were 88% (193/219 pathogens) and 90% (227/251 pathogens) for the evaluable patients treated with cefdinir and loracarbef, respectively. Adverse event rates while on treatment were 30% and 21% for cefdinir- and loracarbef-treated patients, respectively. These results indicate that a five-day regimen of cefdinir is effective and safe for the treatment of patients with acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

[Comparison of pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of cefdinir, cefpodoxime proxetil and cefaclor against common bacteria of community acquired infections].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics property of cefdinir, cefpodoxime proxetil and cefaclor against common bacteria of community acquired infections and evaluate the recommended regimens. METHODS: The antibacterial activities of 3 agents against 238 clinical isolates were determined by standard agar dilution test and the pharmacokinetics of these antibiotics in male healthy volunteers were conducted in Latin-square manner. The time over MIC (T > MIC) of serum antibiotic concentrations were calculated with pharmacokinetic equation and MIC. RESULTS: The value of MIC90 s cefdinir against these bacterial strains except penicillin non-sensitive pneumococci were 0.031-1 mg/L. Cefpodoxime held similar antibacterial activity with cefdinir, but was less potent against staphylococci. Cefaclor had much higher MIC values than other two drugs. After oral administration of 250 mg cefaclor, the drug concentration quickly reached peak concentration of 4.95 mg/L +/- 2.41 mg/L and the eliminative half time was 0.69 h +/- 0.6 h; the Tmax, Cmax and T1/2beta of cefdinir and cefpodoxime after oral administration of 100 mg were 2.5 h +/- 0.48 h, 0.81 mg/L +/- 0.19 mg/L, 1.73 h +/- 0.3 h and 2.38 h +/- 0.43 h, 1.12 mg/L +/- 0.28 mg/L, 1.92 h +/- 0.55 h, respectively. T > MIC of cefdinir in thrice daily administration were longer than 40% of medication interval against most of the tested isolates; no T > MIC period was found in cefpodoxime against staphylococci and the T > MICs of cefaclor after 250 mg oral administration were shorter than expected values against most bacteria. CONCLUSION: With powerful antibacterial activity, the T > MICs of cefdinir after 100 mg oral administration can meet with the clinical requirement in most infections; PK/PD value of cefpodoxime proxetil against staphylococci is lower than expectancy and 250 mg cefaclor 3 times daily is not enough to the treatment of common community acquired infections, the regimens of cefpodoxime proxetil and cefclor should be furtherly optimized.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1993

Cefdinir: in vitro activity study and effect of human serum.

The in-vitro activity of cefdinir (Cl-983, FK482), an orally absorbed aminothiazole cephalosporin, was compared with that of penicillin, ampicillin, amoxycillin, amoxycillin/clavulanic acid (2/1), cefaclor, cefuroxime, cefixime, cefotaxime, vancomycin and erythromycin against 370 clinical isolates of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria. Cefdinir was highly active against Staphylococcus aureus and S. epidermidis, inhibiting 90% of the strains at doses of 0.25 and 0.5 mg/l respectively. However, cefdinir was not active against methicillin-resistant S. aureus (range 16- > 128 mg/l). The respiratory pathogens Moraxella catarrhalis, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and S. pyogenes were also susceptible (MIC90 < or = 0.5 mg/l), but against Enterococcus spp. cefdinir displayed no useful activity. The common members of the family Enterobacteriaceae were susceptible (MIC90 < or = 1 mg/l), but those possessing chromosomal beta-lactamases were more resistant (MIC90 2-8 mg/l). The presence of human serum had little effect on MICs of cefdinir. These results indicate that cefdinir exhibited a wide spectrum for an oral cephalosporin and support its possible clinical use against susceptible pathogens in infections of the skin, soft tissue, respiratory and urinary tracts.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1998

Pharmacokinetics of cefdinir and its transfer to dialysate in patients with chronic renal failure undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.

Cefdinir (CAS 91832-40-5) was administered orally as a 100-mg capsule (Cefzon) to a total of 12 patients with chronic renal failure undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) to investigate changes in the serum concentrations, excretion rate into the dialysate and serum-protein binding of cefdinir. Cmax values were 1.64-4.34 micrograms/ml, t1/2 values were 10.8-21.9 h., and AUC values were 31.1-73.1 micrograms.h/ml (0-30 h) in four patients given a single oral dose of 100 mg of cefdinir as a capsule. About 1 microgram/ml of cefdinir had still remained in the blood of all the patients 24 h after administration. The serum concentrations of cefdinir were dose-dependent in four patients of each group who were given an oral daily dose of 100 mg for 3 to 8 days and 200 mg (2 capsules) for 4 to 14 consecutive days. No marked change in laboratory test values or clinical symptoms before and after administration were observed in these dose regimes. Protein levels of 5.17-5.71 g/day were eliminated from the peritoneal dialysate and urine. Cefdinir inhibited 90 to 100% of the clinical isolates such as Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia coli and other enteric bacteria causing catheter infection and peritonitis, and its antibacterial activity was stronger than that of amoxicillin (CAS 26787-78-0) or cefaclor (CAS 53944-73-3) against these clinical isolates.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Lack of interaction between cefdinir and calcium polycarbophil: in vitro and in vivo studies.

The effect of calcium polycarbophil on the absorption of cefdinir, cephalosporin derivative, was evaluated in both in vitro and in vivo studies. In the in vitro study, the release of cefdinir from a cellulose membrane in the presence or absence of metal cations was measured using the dissolution test procedure. In the in vivo study, volunteers and a randomized crossover design with two phases were used. In the first phase, the volunteers received 200 mg of cefdinir alone (Study 1); in the other phase, they received 200 mg of cefdinir and 1200 mg of fine calcium polycarbophil granules concomitantly (Study 2). The cefdinir concentrations in the samples or serum were measured by an UV-VIS spectrophotometer or high-performance liquid chromatography. Release in the presence of iron ions was slower than that in the absence of metal ions, however no difference was observed between release in the presence of calcium ions and that in the absence of metal ions. No difference was observed in AUC(0-10), C(max) and t(max) between Study 1 and Study 2. The absorption of cefdinir was not affected by co-administration of calcium polycarbophil. Moreover, the in vitro study on the release of drugs from a cellulose membrane may predict the absorption of a drug caused by the formation of chelate complexes between the drug and metal ions.

Clinical Trial↗
PubMed1997

Cefdinir versus amoxicillin/clavulanic acid in the treatment of suppurative acute otitis media in children.

An investigator-blinded, randomized, multicenter study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of cefdinir and amoxicillin/clavulanate (amoxicillin/CA) in the treatment of pediatric patients with acute suppurative otitis media. Patients 6 months to 12 years of age were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive cefdinir 14 mg/kg once-daily, cefdinir 7 mg/kg b.i.d., or amoxicillin/CA 13.3 mg/kg t.i.d. Test-of-cure was determined 11 to 16 days post therapy. Of the 752 patients who entered the study, 665 (88%) completed treatment and 595 (79%) were evaluable. Response rates in the three treatment groups were similar. Overall rates of adverse events were statistically lower in the cefdinir once-daily group than in the amoxicillin/CA group. Diarrhea was the most common adverse event in all treatment groups. Cefdinir given either once-daily or twice-daily is a safe and effective treatment for pediatric patients with acute suppurative otitis media.

Amoxicillin↗
PubMed1993

Cefdinir-induced modification of the susceptibility of bacteria to the antibacterial activity of human serum and polymorphonuclear neutrophils.

The effect of serum on the bactericidal activity of cefdinir, and the ability of the antibiotic to modify the interaction of bacteria with human polymorphonuclear neutrophils were assessed. In the presence of antibiotic, serum-resistant Escherichia coli were sensitised to the bactericidal activity of normal human serum. Cefdinir enhanced opsonophagocytic killing of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus at suprainhibitory concentrations. Significant potentiation of killing occurred with the combination of inhibitory concentrations of cefdinir, neutrophils and sub-optimal levels of serum opsonins. Pre-exposure of Escherichia coli, but not Staphylococcus aureus, to cefdinir enhanced phagocytic uptake and killing of the antibiotic-damaged bacteria. These results indicate that cefdinir-mediated phenotypic modification of Escherichia coli renders the bacteria susceptible to serum antibacterial activity and phagocytic uptake and intracellular killing.

Bacteria↗
PubMed2005

A pooled analysis of seven randomized crossover studies of the palatability of cefdinir oral suspension versus amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium, cefprozil, azithromycin, and amoxicillin in children aged 4 to 8 years.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis of the results of 7 trials compared the taste and smell acceptability scores of cefdinir oral suspension and 4 other pediatric antibiotic oral suspensions--amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium, cefprozil, azithromycin, or generic amoxicillin--using a visual smile-face scale. METHODS: Data from 7 randomized, single-blind, cross-over trials were pooled and analyzed. In each study, children aged 4 to 8 years were asked to taste and smell 2 different antibiotic suspensions and assign preference using a visual smile-face scale. Ratings were converted to a numeric score ranging from 5 (really good) to 1 (really bad). RESULTS: A total of 1011 healthy subjects were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatment-order groups; 965 were evaluable for the taste and smell analyses. Baseline demographics of evaluable subjects were similar among test groups. Approximately even proportions of participants were female or male (50.1 % vs 49.9%), most (84.1%) were white, and slightly more participants were aged 7 or 8 years rather than younger (age 4 years, 16.0%; age 5 years, 17.4%; age 6 years, 18.7%; age 7 years, 23.2%; age 8 years, 24.8%). Of the 965 children who tasted both antibiotic suspensions and determined their preference, 798 (82.7%) rated the taste of cefdinir as really good or good (the highest possible ratings); 712 (73.8%) assigned the same ratings to amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium, cefprozil, azithromycin, or generic amoxicillin (P < or = 0.001). With regard to smell, 671 (69.5%) rated the smell of cefdinir as really good or good; 636 (65.9%) assigned these same ratings to the comparator agents (P = NS). CONCLUSION: In this pooled analysis of data from 7 randomized, single-blind, crossover trials, children between the ages of 4 and 8 years preferred the taste of cefdinir oral suspension to that of other pediatric antibiotic suspensions. Based on smile-face scores, subjects found the smell of cefdinir oral suspension to be at least as good as that of the comparators.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2005

Cefdinir: an oral alternative to parenteral cephems.

Cost savings are possible if oral cephems of equivalent efficacy can be substituted for parenteral cephems. An in vitro study was performed to compare the activity of cefdinir, cefoxitin, cefazolin, ceftriaxone, ceftazidime, and cefepime against 243 clinical isolates of human pathogens. Activities were determined by National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards microbroth dilution methodology using an inoculum of approximately 5 x 10(5) CFU/mL. Cefdinir was the single or equally most potent agent against Streptococcus pyogenes, penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae, methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus, and Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates that produced a variety of beta-lactamase types. Cefdinir was less potent than ceftriaxone, ceftazidime, and cefepime against Haemophilus influenzae, but was 2- to 8-fold more potent than cefoxitin and 8- to 32-fold more potent than cefazolin. Cefdinir was slightly less potent than ceftazidime, against beta-lactamase-positive Moraxella catarrhalis. These data support clinical consideration of cefdinir as an alternative to parenteral cephems in infections where adequate tissue levels can be safely assured.

Administration, Oral↗