The comparative pharmacokinetic profile of cefquinome was studied in sheep and goats following repeated intramuscular (IM) administrations of 2？mg/kg body weight. Cefquinome concentrations in serum were determined by microbiological assay technique using Micrococcus luteus (ATCC 9341) as test organism. Following intramuscular injection of cefquinome in sheep and goats, the disposition curves were best described by two-compartment open model in both sheep and goats. The pharmacokinetics of cefquinome did not differ significantly between sheep and goats; similar intramuscular dose rate of cefquinome should therefore be applicable to both species. On comparing the data of serum levels of repeated intramuscular injections with first intramuscular injection, it was revealed that repeated intramuscular injections of cefquinome have cumulative effect in both species sheep and goats. The in vitro serum protein-binding tendency was 15.65% in sheep and 14.42% in goats. The serum concentrations of cefquinome along 24？h after injection in this study were exceeding the MICs of different susceptible microorganisms responsible for serious disease problems. These findings indicate successful use of cefquinome in sheep and goats. 1. Introduction Cephalosporins are described as -lactam antibiotics, based on their common structural feature, containing the -lactam ring. A major advantage of the -lactam antibiotics is high degree of safety in the target animal [1]. Cefquinome, an aminothiazolyl cephalosporin, is a member of the fourth-generation of cephalosporins that has been used for veterinary use only [2]. It has broad-spectrum antibacterial activity against clinically important bacteria such as streptococcus spp, staphylococcus spp, pseudomonas spp, E. coli, and gram-positive anaerobes [3, 4]. It has been approved for the treatment of respiratory diseases, acute mastitis, and foot rot in cattle [5, 6]. The objective of the current study is to determine whether there are differences between sheep and goat in the disposition of cefquinome following repeated intramuscular administrations of 2？mg/kg？b.wt. once daily for three consecutive days in sheep and goat, to determine if the drug has a cumulative effect after repeated intramuscular administrations and to recommend appropriate dose regimen for cefquinome in sheep and goat. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Antimicrobial Agent Cefquinome was obtained from Intervet International Company, Cairo, Egypt, under a trade name: Cobactan 2.5%. 2.2. Animals Five healthy nonlactating female Egyptian Baladi sheep (weighing
References
[1]
D. A. Preston, “Overview of the development of a new class of β-lactam antibiotics: the carbacephems,” Antimicrobic Newsletter, vol. 8, no. 8-9, pp. 58–63, 1992.
[2]
S. P. Murphy, M. E. Erwin, and R. N. Jones, “Cefquinome (HR 111V) in vitro evaluation of a Broad-Spectrum cephalosporin indicated for infections in animals,” Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 49–55, 1994.
[3]
V. Guérin-Faublée, G. Carret, and P. Houffschmitt, “In vitro activity of 10 antimicrobial agents against bacteria isolated from cows with clinical mastitis,” Veterinary Record, vol. 152, no. 15, pp. 466–471, 2003.
[4]
N. Y. Shpigel, D. Levin, M. Winkler, A. Saran, G. Ziv, and A. Bottner, “Efficacy of cefquinome for treatment of cows with mastitis experimentally induced using Escherichia coli,” Journal of Dairy Science, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 318–323, 1997.
[5]
D. J. Wilson, R. N. Gonzalez, and H. H. Das, “Bovine mastitis pathogens in New York and Pennsylvania: prevalence and effects of somatic cell count and milk production,” Journal of Dairy Research, vol. 80, no. 10, pp. 2592–2598, 1996.
[6]
P. Schmid and V. Thomas, “Cefquinome-eight year’s antimicrobial susceptibility surveillance in cattle,” in Proceedings of the 22nd World Buiatrics Congress, vol. 147, no. 1, pp. 456–464, Hannover, Germany, August 2002.
[7]
K. Uney, F. Altan, and M. Elmas, “Development and validation of an HPLC method for the determination of cefquinome in sheep plasma and its application to the pharmacokinetics study,” Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 854–859, 2010.
[8]
B. Arret, D. P. Johnson, and A. Kirshbaum, “Outline of details for microbiological assays of antibiotics: second revision,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, vol. 60, no. 11, pp. 1689–1694, 1971.
[9]
B. N. San Martín, J. Bataglia, P. Hern？ndez, A. Quiroz, and H. Ca？on, “Absorption and excretion of cefquinome in Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) in fresh water at 10°C,” Journal of Veterinary Medicine Series A: Physiology Pathology Clinical Medicine, vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 615–623, 1998.
[10]
A. W. Craig and B. Suh, “Protein binding and the antibacterial effects: methods for determination of protein binding,” in Antibiotics in Laboratory Medicine, V. Lorian, Ed., pp. 265–297, Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, Md, USA, 1980.
[11]
K. Yamaoka, T. Nakagawa, and T. Uno, “Statistical moments in pharmacokinetics,” Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 547–558, 1978.
[12]
M. Gibaldi and D. Perrier, Pharmacokinetics, Marcel Dedder, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 1982.
[13]
G. W. Snedecor and T. Cochran, Statistical Methods, pp. 502-503, Iowa State University Press, Ames, lowa, USA, 6th edition, 1976.
[14]
M. A. Tohamy, “Age-related intramuscular pharmacokinetics of cefquinome in sheep,” Small Ruminant Research, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 72–76, 2011.
[15]
X. B. Li, W. X. Wu, D. Su, Z. J. Wang, H. Y. Jiang, and J. Z. Shen, “Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of cefquinome in healthy piglets,” Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 523–527, 2008.
[16]
L. Yuan, J. Sun, R. Wang et al., “Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of cefquinome in healthy ducks,” American Journal of Veterinary Research, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 122–126, 2011.
[17]
V. K. Dumka, V. Dinakaran, B. Ranjan, and S. Rampal, “Comparative pharmacokinetics of cefquinome following intravenous and intramuscular administration in goats,” Small Ruminant Research, vol. 113, no. 1, pp. 273–277, 2013.
[18]
A. Y. Al-Taher, “Pharinacokinetics of Cefquinome in camels,” Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 848–852, 2010.
[19]
N. S. Haddad, W. M. Pedersoli, and W. R. Ravis, “Pharmacokinetics of gentamicin at steady-state in ponies: serum, urine, and endometrial concentrations,” American Journal of Veterinary Research, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1268–1271, 1985.
[20]
A. M. El-Gendy, M. A. Tohamy, and A. M. Radi, “Pharmacokinetic profile and some pharmacodynamic aspects of cefquinome in chickens,” Beni-Suef Veterinary Medical Journal, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 33–37, 2009.
[21]
M. A. Tohamy, M. Ismail, and A. M. El-Gendy, “Comparative pharmacokinetics of cefquinome in ruminant,” Journal of the Egyptian Society of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 12–18, 2006.
[22]
A. L. Craigmill, M. A. Pass, and S. Wetzlich, “Comparative pharmacokinetics of amoxicillin administered intravenously to sheep and goats,” Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 72–77, 1992.
[23]
H. A. Elsheikh, A. A. W. Taha, A. I. Khalafallah, and I. A. M. Osman, “Disposition kinetics of enrofloxacin (Baytryl 5%) in sheep and goats following intravenous and intramuscular injection using a microbiological assay,” Research in Veterinary Science, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 125–129, 2002.
[24]
H. A. El-Banna and K. Abo El-Sooud, “Disposition kinetics of ciprofloxacin in lactating goats,” Deutsche Tier？rztliche Wochenschrift, vol. 105, no. 1, pp. 35–38, 1998.
[25]
G. Ziv and F. G. Sulman, “Binding of antibiotics to bovine and ovine serum,” Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 206–213, 1972.
[26]
N.-X. Chin, J.-W. Gu, W. Fang, and H. C. Neu, “In vitro activity of cefquinome, a new cephalosporin, compared with other cephalosporin antibiotics,” Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 331–337, 1992.
[27]
J. A. Orden, J. A. Ruiz-Santa-Quiteria, S. García, D. Cid, and R. de la Fuente, “In vitro activities of cephalosporins and quinolones against Escherichia coli strains isolated from diarrheic dairy calves,” Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 510–513, 1999.
[28]
L. Deshpande, M. A. Pfaller, and R. N. Jones, “In vitro activity of ceftiofur tested against clinical isolates of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae including extended spectrum β-lactamase producing strains,” International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 271–275, 2000.
[29]
I. M. Sheldon, M. Bushnell, J. Montgomery, and A. N. Rycroft, “Minimum inhibitory concentrations of some antimicrobial drugs against bacteria causing uterine infections in cattle,” Veterinary Record, vol. 155, no. 13, pp. 383–387, 2004.
[30]
E. Thomas, V. Thomas, and C. Wilhelm, “Antibacterial activity of cefquinome against equine bacterial pathogens,” Veterinary Microbiology, vol. 115, no. 1–3, pp. 140–147, 2006.
[31]
J. Wallmann, A. B？ttner, L. Goossens et al., “Results of an interlaboratory test on antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacteria from animals by broth microdilution,” International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 482–490, 2006.
