Induction of telithromycin resistance by erythromycin in isolates of macrolide-resistant Staphylococcus spp

Acquired inducible antimicrobial resistance in Gram-positive bacteria

A major contributor to the emergence of antibiotic resistance in Gram-positive bacterial pathogens is the expansion of acquired, inducible genetic elements. Although acquired, inducible antibiotic resistance is not new, the interest in its molecular basis has been accelerated by the widening distribution and often 'silent' spread of the elements responsible, the diagnostic challenges of such resistance and the mounting limitations of available agents to treat Gram-positive infections. Acquired, inducible antibiotic resistance elements belong to the accessory genome of a species and are horizontally acquired by transformation/recombination or through the transfer of mobile DNA elements. The two key, but mechanistically very different, induction mechanisms are: ribosome-sensed induction, characteristic of the macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B antibiotics and tetracycline resistance, leading to ribosomal modifications or efflux pump activation; and resistance by cell surface-associated sensing of β-lactams (e.g., oxacillin), glycopeptides (e.g., vancomycin) and the polypeptide bacitracin, leading to drug inactivation or resistance due to cell wall alterations.

CEM-101 activity against Gram-positive organisms

The in vitro activity of CEM-101, a new fluoroketolide, was determined against Gram-positive organisms with various macrolide susceptibility profiles. Experiments for determination of the MICs and minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBCs), timed killing, single-step and multistep mutation rates, the erythromycin induction of resistance, postantibiotic effect (PAE), and drug interactions were performed for CEM-101; and the results were compared to those obtained with telithromycin, macrolides, and lincosamides. The MBCs of CEM-101 remained lower overall than those of telithromycin, and CEM-101 displayed a 2-fold greater potency than the ketolide. Timed-killing curve testing showed that CEM-101 had greater bactericidal activity than telithromycin (a >or=3-log(10)-CFU/ml decrease in the initial inoculum at 24 h) against the staphylococcal isolates tested. The propensity of CEM-101 to cause resistance was low, as determined from the rates of resistance determined in single-step mutational studies (<10(-8) or 10(-9)). In multipassaging studies, mutants of two strains (both of which were USA300 isolates) resistant to CEM-101 emerged. That number was comparable to the number resistant to clindamycin but less than the number resistant to telithromycin. Erythromycin induced CEM-101 resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae, similar to telithromycin; however, in seven of eight beta-hemolytic streptococci, CEM-101 resistance induction was not observed. CEM-101 showed a significant concentration- and exposure-dependent PAE against the strains tested, with the values ranging from 2.3 to 6.1 h for Gram-positive organisms (these times were longer than those for telithromycin). No antagonism was found in synergy analyses, with enhanced inhibition being most noted for combinations with CEM-101 and ceftriaxone, gentamicin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Overall, this new antimicrobial agent (CEM-101) showed good antimicrobial characteristics compared with those of the agents in its class and exhibited measured parameter values similar or superior to those of utilized comparators, indicating that CEM-101 warrants further clinical evaluation.

In vitro activity of telithromycin and quinupristin/dalfopristin against methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci with defined resistance genotypes

We determined the activities of new antibiotics telithromycin (ketolide) and quinupristin/dalfopristin (streptogramins) against 88 macrolide and/or lincosamide resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) isolates with defined resistance gene status. Telithromycin susceptibility was determined only in erythromycin-sensitive isolates (15) indicating the same mechanisms of resistance. In contrast, all erythromycin-resistant isolates (73) were either constitutively resistant to telithromycin (13 isolates with constitutive erm genes) or demonstrated telithromycin D-shaped zone (60 isolates with inducible msr(A) and/or erm). However, the level of inducible resistance conferred by msr(A) (35 isolates) was borderline even after induction by erythromycin. No quinupristin/dalfopristin resistant isolate was observed if tested by disk-diffusion method (DDM) but 18 isolates were intermediate (MIC = 1-3 mg/L) and two isolates resistant (MIC = 8 mg/L) if tested by E-test. All these isolates were resistant to streptogramin A and harbored vga(A) gene (1 isolate) or vga(A)LC gene (19 isolates). MICs for quinupristin/dalfopristin were higher for isolates with combination of streptogramin A resistance and constitutive MLSB resistance (MIC = 3-8 mg/L in 4 isolates) than for streptogramin A-resistant isolates susceptible to streptogramin B (MIC = 0.5-2 mg/L in 16 isolates). In addition to S. haemolyticus, vga(A)LC was newly identified in S. epidermidis and S. warnerii indicating its widespread occurrence in CoNS. Misidentification of low-level resistant isolates by DDM may contribute to dissemination of streptogramin A resistance.

Modes and modulations of antibiotic resistance gene expression

Since antibiotic resistance usually affords a gain of function, there is an associated biological cost resulting in a loss of fitness of the bacterial host. Considering that antibiotic resistance is most often only transiently advantageous to bacteria, an efficient and elegant way for them to escape the lethal action of drugs is the alteration of resistance gene expression. It appears that expression of bacterial resistance to antibiotics is frequently regulated, which indicates that modulation of gene expression probably reflects a good compromise between energy saving and adjustment to a rapidly evolving environment. Modulation of gene expression can occur at the transcriptional or translational level following mutations or the movement of mobile genetic elements and may involve induction by the antibiotic. In the latter case, the antibiotic can have a triple activity: as an antibacterial agent, as an inducer of resistance to itself, and as an inducer of the dissemination of resistance determinants. We will review certain mechanisms, all reversible, that bacteria have elaborated to achieve antibiotic resistance by the fine-tuning of the expression of genetic information.

Resistance phenotypes conferred by macrolide phosphotransferases

This study aims to compare the resistance phenotypes conferred by various genes encoding enzymes that phosphorylate erythromycin. The mph genes were cloned into Escherichia coli AG100A susceptible to macrolides and ketolides following disruption of the AcrAB pump. An 882 bp sequence containing a premature stop codon, homologous to the three other previously described mph genes and present widely among Enterobacteriaceae, was found to confer resistance to erythromycin by phosphorylation. The mph(C) gene, as reported for mph(B), also conferred resistance to spiramycin. The mph(A) gene was unique in conferring resistance to azithromycin. The four investigated genes conferred resistance to telithromycin.

Investigation of inducible clindamycin and telithromycin resistance in isolates of β-hemolytic streptococci

We evaluated the accuracy of an erythromycin-clindamycin double-disk test (D-zone test) and an erythromycin-telithromycin D-zone test for detection of inducible resistance in isolates of beta-hemolytic streptococci with erythromycin resistance. The results of these tests were compared to results of a broth microdilution (BMD) induction test using combinations of erythromycin and either clindamycin or telithromycin. Of 29 erythromycin-resistant, clindamycin-susceptible isolates, 16 were positive by the erythromycin-clindamycin D-zone test; all of these demonstrated inducible clindamycin resistance by BMD. Twelve isolates were D-zone test-negative, did not demonstrate inducible resistance by BMD, and were positive for a mef determinant. Of 39 erythromycin-resistant, telithromycin-susceptible isolates, 13 were erythromycin-telithromycin D-zone test-positive, 19 questionably positive (unclear blunting of the zone), and 7 were D-zone test-negative. The erythromycin-telithromycin D-zone test result did not correlate with inducible resistance by BMD or the presence of an erm or mef gene. These results demonstrate that the erythromycin-clindamycin D-zone and BMD induction tests accurately detect inducible clindamycin resistance, but the erythromycin-telithromycin D-zone test is not reliable for detecting inducible telithromycin resistance.