1990Journal of Antimicrobial ChemotherapyRequires access

In-vitro activity of azithromycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin and norfloxacin against Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Haemophilus ducreyi, and Chlamydia trachomatis

L Slaney, Helen Chubb, Allan Ronald, ROBERT C. BRUNHAM

Open publisher page 76 citations

Abstract

The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of azithromycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin and norfloxacin for 300 strains of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, 100 strains of Haemophilus ducreyi and six strains of Chlamydia trachomatis were determined. The two quinolones were more active against gonococcal strains than were the two macrolides. Azithromycin was approximately eight-fold more active against N. gonorrhoeae than was erythromycin (MIC90: 0.25 mg/l azithromycin, 2.0 mg/l erythromycin). The Mtr phenotype of gonococci increased azithromycin MICs approximately four fold. Azithromycin was less active than erythromycin against C. trachomatis. Azithromycin had considerable activity against H. ducreyi and was ten-fold more active than was erythromycin (MIC90: 0.004 mg/l azithromycin, 0.03 mg/l erythromycin). Clinical trials of azithromycin in the treatment of chlamydial infection and genital ulcer disease are indicated.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of azithromycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin and norfloxacin for 300 strains of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, 100 strains of Haemophilus ducreyi and six strains of Chlamydia trachomatis were determined. The two quinolones were more active against gonococcal strains than were the two macrolides. Azithromycin was approximately eight-fold more active against N. gonorrhoeae than was erythromycin (MIC90: 0.25 mg/l azithromycin, 2.0 mg/l erythromycin). The Mtr phenotype of gonococci increased azithromycin MICs approximately four fold. Azithromycin was less active than erythromycin against C. trachomatis. Azithromycin had considerable activity against H. ducreyi and was ten-fold more active than was erythromycin (MIC90: 0.004 mg/l azithromycin, 0.03 mg/l erythromycin). Clinical trials of azithromycin in the treatment of chlamydial infection and genital ulcer disease are indicated.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 76 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of azithromycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin and norfloxacin for 300 strains of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, 100 strains of Haemophilus ducreyi and six strains of Chlamydia trachomatis were determined. The two quinolones were more active against gonococcal strains than were the two macrolides. Azithromycin was approximately eight-fold more active against N. gonorrhoeae than was erythromycin (MIC90: 0.25 mg/l azithromycin, 2.0 mg/l erythromycin). The Mtr phenotype of gonococci increased azithromycin MICs approximately four fold. Azithromycin was less active than erythromycin against C. trachomatis. Azithromycin had considerable activity against H. ducreyi and was ten-fold more active than was erythromycin (MIC90: 0.004 mg/l azithromycin, 0.03 mg/l erythromycin). Clinical trials of azithromycin in the treatment of chlamydial infection and genital ulcer disease are indicated.

Key concepts: Azithromycin, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Haemophilus ducreyi, Chlamydia trachomatis, Microbiology, Ciprofloxacin, Erythromycin, Norfloxacin

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
In-vitro activity of azithromycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin and norfloxacin against Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Haemophilus ducreyi, and Chlamydia trachomatis — Research Paper | ScholarLens