Concentration-dependent enrichment of resistant Enterococcus faecium exposed to linezolid in an in vitro dynamic model

A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) model-based analysis of tedizolid against enterococci using the hollow-fibre infection model

BACKGROUND

Tedizolid is a novel oxazolidinone antibiotic. Considering the higher antibacterial effect in immunocompetent compared with immunosuppressed animals, it is not recommended in immunocompromised patients.

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we assessed the 'pure' pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) relationship for tedizolid against Enterococcus in the hollow-fibre infection model (HFIM).

METHODS

Unbound plasma concentration time profiles (200-5000 mg/day IV) were simulated in the HFIM over 120 h against an Enterococcus faecalis strain and two clinical isolates of Enterococcus faecium (VRE-vanB and VRE-vanA). Next, a PKPD model describing tedizolid efficacy against bacterial isolates was developed. A population PK model was linked to the developed PKPD model and utilized to predict the bacterial kinetics in plasma and in target tissues [adipose, muscle, epithelial lining fluid (ELF) and sputum] over 120 h of therapy.

RESULTS

The PKPD model adequately described the bacterial kill kinetics for all bacterial populations. At the human recommended dose of 200 mg/day, bacterial growth was predicted in plasma and all tissues, except for ELF. Bacteriostasis was observed only at a higher dose of 1200 mg/day over 120 h. An fAUC/MIC of 80 related to stasis over 120 h. Subpopulations resistant to 3 × MIC were amplified in plasma and target tissues, except for ELF, at doses of 200-800 mg/day.

CONCLUSIONS

The human dose of 200 mg/day was insufficient to suppress bacterial growth in the HFIM, indicating that further components contribute to the clinical effect of tedizolid. This study supports the warning/precaution for tedizolid to limit its use in immunocompromised patients.

MPC-Based Prediction of Anti-Mutant Effectiveness of Antibiotic Combinations: In Vitro Model Study with Daptomycin and Gentamicin against Staphylococcus aureus

To explore whether combined treatments with daptomycin and gentamicin can prevent the development of Staphylococcus aureus resistance, and whether the possible restriction is associated with changes in antibiotic mutant prevention concentrations (MPCs), the enrichment of daptomycin- and gentamicin-resistant mutants was studied by simulating 5-day single and combined treatments in an in vitro dynamic model. The MPCs of the antibiotics in the combination were determined at concentration ratios equal to the ratios of 24 h areas, under the concentration–time curve (AUCs) of the antibiotics, as simulated in pharmacodynamic experiments. The MPCs of both daptomycin and gentamicin decreased in the presence of each other; this led to an increase in the time when antibiotic concentrations were above the MPC (T_>MPC). The increases in T_>MPCs were concurrent with increases of the anti-mutant effects of the combined antibiotics. When anti-mutant effects of the antibiotics in single and combined treatments were plotted against the T_>MPCs, significant sigmoid relationships were obtained. These findings suggest that (1) daptomycin–gentamicin combinations prevent the development of S. aureus resistance to each antibiotic; (2) the anti-mutant effects of antibiotic combinations can be predicted using MPCs determined at pharmacokinetic-based antibiotic concentration ratios; (3) T_>MPC is a reliable predictor of the anti-mutant efficacy of antibiotic combinations.

Anti-mutant efficacy of antibiotic combinations: in vitro model studies with linezolid and daptomycin

OBJECTIVES

To explore whether linezolid/daptomycin combinations can restrict Staphylococcus aureus resistance and if this restriction is associated with changes in the mutant prevention concentrations (MPCs) of the antibiotics in combination, the enrichment of resistant mutants was studied in an in vitro dynamic model.

METHODS

Two MRSA strains, vancomycin-intermediate resistant ATCC 700699 and vancomycin-susceptible 2061 (both susceptible to linezolid and daptomycin), and their linezolid-resistant mutants selected by passaging on antibiotic-containing medium were used in the study. MPCs of antibiotics in combination were determined at a linezolid-to-daptomycin concentration ratio (1:2) that corresponds to the ratio of 24 h AUCs (AUC24s) actually used in the pharmacokinetic simulations. Each S. aureus strain was supplemented with respective linezolid-resistant mutants (mutation frequency 10-8) and treated with twice-daily linezolid and once-daily daptomycin, alone and in combination, simulated at therapeutic and sub-therapeutic AUC24s.

RESULTS

Numbers of linezolid-resistant mutants increased at therapeutic and sub-therapeutic AUC24s, whereas daptomycin-resistant mutants were enriched only at sub-therapeutic AUC24 in single drug treatments. Linezolid/daptomycin combinations prevented the enrichment of linezolid-resistant S. aureus and restricted the enrichment of daptomycin-resistant mutants. The pronounced anti-mutant effects of the combinations were attributed to lengthening the time above MPC of both linezolid and daptomycin as their MPCs were lowered.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that (i) the inhibition of S. aureus resistant mutants using linezolid/daptomycin combinations can be predicted by MPCs determined at pharmacokinetically derived antibiotic concentration ratios and (ii) T>MPC is a reliable predictor of the anti-mutant efficacy of antibiotic combinations as studied using in vitro dynamic models.

Synergistic Combination of Linezolid and Fosfomycin Closing Each Other's Mutant Selection Window to Prevent Enterococcal Resistance

Enterococci, the main pathogens associated with nosocomial infections, are resistant to many common antibacterial drugs including β-lactams, aminoglycosides, etc. Combination therapy is considered an effective way to prevent bacterial resistance. Preliminary studies in our group have shown that linezolid combined with fosfomycin has synergistic or additive antibacterial activity against enterococci, while the ability of the combination to prevent resistance remains unknown. In this study, we determined mutant prevention concentration (MPC) and mutant selection window (MSW) of linezolid, fosfomycin alone and in combination including different proportions for five clinical isolates of Enterococcus and characterized the resistance mechanism for resistant mutants. The results indicated that different proportions of linezolid combined with fosfomycin had presented different MPCs and MSWs. Compared with linezolid or fosfomycin alone, the combination can restrict the enrichment of resistant mutants at a lower concentration. A rough positive correlation between the selection index (SI) of the two agents in combination and the fractional inhibitory concentration index (FICI) of the combination displayed that the smaller FICI of linezolid and fosfomycin, the more probable their MSWs were to close each other. Mutations in ribosomal proteins (L3 and L4) were the mechanisms for linezolid resistant mutants. Among the fosfomycin-resistant mutants, only two strains have detected the MurA gene mutation related to fosfomycin resistance. In conclusion, the synergistic combination of linezolid and fosfomycin closing each other’s MSW could effectively suppress the selection of enterococcus resistant mutants, suggesting that the combination may be an alternative for preventing enterococcal resistance. In this study, the resistance mechanism of fosfomycin remains to be further studied.