J. Prieto
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
J. Prieto has a total of 24 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
F. Fuentes
Department of Microbiology, School of Medicine, University Complutense of Madrid, Av. Complutense S/N, Madrid 28040, Spain
4 shared publications- Luis Alou
Microbiology Area, Medicine Department, School of Medicine, Universidad Complutense de Madrid
4 shared publications - María-José Giménez
Universidad Europea de Madrid, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Sports, Department of Physiotherapy, Campus de Villaviciosa, Calle Tajo s/n, 28670 Villaviciosa de Odón, Madrid, Spain
3 shared publications L Aguilar
Medical Department, GlaxoSmithKline, Tres Cantos, Madrid, Spain
2 shared publicationsM.L. Gómez-Lus
Department of Microbiology, School of Medicine, University Complutense of Madrid, Av. Complutense S/N, Madrid 28040, Spain
2 shared publicationsA Calvo
Department of Microbiology, School of Medicine, Universidad Complutense, Avda. Complutense s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 1 September 2001
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
- Vol. 18 (3) , 231-238
Influence of diminished susceptibility of Streptococcus pneumoniae to ciprofloxacin on the serum bactericidal activity of gemifloxacin and trovafloxacin after a single dose in healthy volunteers
- 1 September 2001
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
- Vol. 18 (3) , 231-238
Influence of diminished susceptibility of Streptococcus pneumoniae to ciprofloxacin on the serum bactericidal activity of gemifloxacin and trovafloxacin after a single dose in healthy volunteers
- 30 April 2001
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
- Vol. 17 (5) , 365-370
Evaluation of two in vitro pharmacodynamic simulation models: microfiltration versus centrifugation–filtration
- 30 April 2001
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
- Vol. 17 (5) , 365-370
Evaluation of two in vitro pharmacodynamic simulation models: microfiltration versus centrifugation–filtration
- 1 October 2000
- Published by Springer Nature in Infection
- Vol. 28 (5) , 305-308
Ex vivo bactericidal activity against group C Neisseria meningitidis in seronegative subjects.
- 1 October 2000
- Published by Springer Nature in Infection
- Vol. 28 (5) , 305-308
Ex vivo bactericidal activity against group C Neisseria meningitidis in seronegative subjects.
- 11 June 1999
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
- Vol. 12 (2) , 135-139
Efficacy of trovafloxacin in an in vitro pharmacodynamic simulation of an intraabdominal infection
- 11 June 1999
- Published by Elsevier in International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
- Vol. 12 (2) , 135-139
Efficacy of trovafloxacin in an in vitro pharmacodynamic simulation of an intraabdominal infection
- 1 February 1998
- Published by American Society for Microbiology in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
- Vol. 42 (2) , 414-418
Postantibiotic and Sub-MIC Effects of Azithromycin and Isepamicin against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli
Investigations of pharmacodynamic parameters (postantibiotic effect [PAE], sub-MIC effects [SMEs], etc.) have been progressively employed for the design of dosing schedules of antimicrobial agents. However, there are fewer in vivo than in vitro data, probably because of the simplicity of the in vitro procedures. In this study, we have investigated the in vitro PAE, SME, and previously treated (postantibiotic [PA]) SME (1/2 MIC, 1/4 MIC and 1/8 MIC) of azithromycin and isepamicin against standard strains of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli by using centrifugation to remove the antibiotics. In addition, the in vivo PAE and SME have been studied with the thigh infection model in neutropenic mice. Finally, in vivo killing curves with two dosing schedules were determined to examine whether the PAE can cover the time that antimicrobial agents are below the MIC. The two antimicrobial agents induced moderate-to-high in vitro PAEs, SMEs, and PA SMEs against S. aureus (>8 h) and E. coli (3.38 to >7.64 h). The in vivo PAEs were also high (from 3.0 to 3.6 h), despite the fact that isepamicin had lower times above the MIC in serum. Only azithromycin showed a high in vivo SME against the two strains (1.22 and 1.75 h), which indicated that the in vivo PAEs were possibly overestimated. In the killing kinetics, no great differences (10 ) were observed between the schedule that took the PAE into account and the continuous administration of doses. These results are comparable with those of other authors and suggest that these antimicrobial agents could be administered at longer intervals without losing effectiveness.
- 1 February 1998
- Published by American Society for Microbiology in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
- Vol. 42 (2) , 414-418
Postantibiotic and Sub-MIC Effects of Azithromycin and Isepamicin against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli
Investigations of pharmacodynamic parameters (postantibiotic effect [PAE], sub-MIC effects [SMEs], etc.) have been progressively employed for the design of dosing schedules of antimicrobial agents. However, there are fewer in vivo than in vitro data, probably because of the simplicity of the in vitro procedures. In this study, we have investigated the in vitro PAE, SME, and previously treated (postantibiotic [PA]) SME (1/2 MIC, 1/4 MIC and 1/8 MIC) of azithromycin and isepamicin against standard strains of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli by using centrifugation to remove the antibiotics. In addition, the in vivo PAE and SME have been studied with the thigh infection model in neutropenic mice. Finally, in vivo killing curves with two dosing schedules were determined to examine whether the PAE can cover the time that antimicrobial agents are below the MIC. The two antimicrobial agents induced moderate-to-high in vitro PAEs, SMEs, and PA SMEs against S. aureus (>8 h) and E. coli (3.38 to >7.64 h). The in vivo PAEs were also high (from 3.0 to 3.6 h), despite the fact that isepamicin had lower times above the MIC in serum. Only azithromycin showed a high in vivo SME against the two strains (1.22 and 1.75 h), which indicated that the in vivo PAEs were possibly overestimated. In the killing kinetics, no great differences (10 ) were observed between the schedule that took the PAE into account and the continuous administration of doses. These results are comparable with those of other authors and suggest that these antimicrobial agents could be administered at longer intervals without losing effectiveness.