Loracarbef An official website of the United States government Here's how you know Log inAccess keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain NavigationBookshelfSearch databaseBooksAll DatabasesAssemblyBiocollectionsBioProjectBioSampleBooksClinVarConserved DomainsdbGaPdbVarGeneGenomeGEO DataSetsGEO ProfilesGTRHomoloGeneIdentical Protein GroupsMedGenMeSHNLM LactationAlthough no information is available on the use of loracarbef during breastfeeding, beta-lactam antibiotics are generally not be expected to cause adverse effects in breastfed infants. Occasionally disruption of the infant's gastrointestinal flora, resulting in diarrhea or thrush have been reported with beta-lactams, but these effects have not been adequately evaluated. Loracarbef is acceptable
ReferencesDrugs and Lactation Database (LactMed) - About Dietary SupplementsBreastfeeding LinksRelated informationPubChem SubstanceSimilar articles in PubMedReview Ceftaroline.[Drugs and Lactation Database (...]Review Cefepime.[Drugs and Lactation Database (...]Review Cefditoren.[Drugs and Lactation Database (...]Review Cefdinir.[Drugs and Lactation Database (...]Review Loracarbef.[Drugs and Lactation Database
. Thekcat,Km, andkcat/Kmvalues calculated for the two mutants were slightly different from those of the wild-type enzyme. Interestingly, thekcat/Kmof NDM-1(I35S)for loracarbef was about 14-fold higher than that of NDM-1. Far-UV circular dichroism (CD) spectra of NDM-1 and NDM-1(I35T)and NDM-1(I35S)enzymes suggest local structural rearrangements in the secondary structure with a marked reduction of α-helix
Twice-daily dosing of loracarbef 200 mg versus 400 mg in the treatment of patients with acute maxillary sinusitis. Loracarbef is an oral synthetic beta-lactam antibiotic in the new carbacephem class. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety of loracarbef 200 mg twice daily (BID) and 400 mg BID when given orally for 10 days . There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups in the incidence of specific adverse events reported during therapy. These data suggest that loracarbef 200 mg BID is comparable in efficacy and safety to loracarbef 400 mg BID in the treatment of patients with acute maxillary sinusitis.
Loracarbef versus doxycycline in the treatment of acute bacterial maxillary sinusitis. Scandinavian Study Group. In a double-blind, multicentre study, 662 patients with acute maxillary sinusitis were randomly assigned to receive either loracarbef 400 mg bd (332 patients) or doxycycline, 200 mg for the first dose followed by 100 mg od, (330 patients) for ten days. One hundred and sixty-eight patients in the loracarbef group and 164 in the doxycycline group were evaluable for efficacy. Streptococcus pneumoniae and/or Haemophilus influenzae were isolated from approximately 75% of patients. The clinical response rate (cure or improvement) was significantly higher for patients receiving loracarbef (98.2%) than for those who received doxycycline (92.2%). There was no significant difference
and had a posttherapy visit. The antibiotics used were cefixime (38), cefaclor (25), loracarbef (14), amoxicillin plus clavulanate (16) or amoxicillin (9). Fifty-five of the 102 (54%) study subjects were classified as cured or improved at the 21- to 28-day posttherapy visit. Factors analyzed in relation to outcome included antibiotic administered, isolation of a pathogen from the middle ear aspirate
Comparative United States and European trials of loracarbef in the treatment of acute otitis media. Acute otitis media with effusion is one of the most common infectious diseases of childhood. Two multicenter randomized controlled clinical trials were conducted to assess the relative safety and efficacy of loracarbef and either amoxicillin/clavulanate or amoxicillin in the treatment of acute susceptible to both study drugs to be continued in the study and declared evaluable. The first study, conducted at 24 United States centers, compared loracarbef 30 mg/kg/day in two divided doses and amoxicillin/clavulanate 40 mg/kg/day in three divided doses each for 10 days. At the posttherapy visit 124 (87.3%) of 142 evaluable loracarbef-treated patients and 130 (91.5%) of 142 evaluable amoxicillin
Loracarbef (LY163892) vs. penicillin VK in the treatment of streptococcal pharyngitis and tonsillitis. A double blind, randomized clinical trial compared loracarbef (LY163892) with penicillin VK. Two hundred thirty-three pediatric patients (less than or equal to 12 years) with a diagnosis of pharyngitis or tonsillitis resulting from Group A beta-hemolytic streptococci were randomized to treatment . Patients in the loracarbef group (n = 120) received loracarbef as a 15-mg/kg/day oral suspension or 200-mg capsule taken twice daily for 10 days. Patients in the penicillin group (n = 113) received penicillin VK as a 20-mg/kg/day oral suspension or 250-mg capsule taken four times daily for 10 days. Successful clinical responses were demonstrated in 101 of the 104 (97.1%) evaluable patients treated
Loracarbef vs. cefaclor in pediatric skin and skin structure infections. A double blind, randomized clinical trial involving 214 children, ages 6 months to 12 years, compared the safety and effectiveness of the new carbacephem loracarbef and the cephalosporin cefaclor for the treatment of skin and skin structure infections. The two agents were given primarily as oral suspensions. Dosages were 15 mg/kg/day in two divided doses for loracarbef and 20 mg/kg/day in three divided doses for cefaclor. Assessment 72 hours after completion of the 7-day course of treatment indicated a favorable clinical response plus eradication of the pretherapy pathogen in 97.3% of the 74 loracarbef-treated patients eligible for evaluation and 92.3% of 78 evaluable cefaclor-treated patients. Favorable response