Antibiotics as immunomodulators: a potential pharmacologic approach for ARDS treatment

First described in the mid-1960s, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening form of respiratory failure with an overall mortality rate of approximately 40%. Despite significant advances in the understanding and treatment of ARDS, no substantive pharmacologic therapy has proven to be beneficial, and current management continues to be primarily supportive. Beyond their antibacterial activity, several antibiotics such as macrolides and tetracyclines exert pleiotropic immunomodulatory effects that might be able to rectify the dysregulated inflammatory response present in patients with ARDS. This review aims to provide an overview of preclinical and clinical studies that describe the immunomodulatory effects of antibiotics in ARDS. Moreover, the underlying mechanisms of their immunomodulatory properties will be discussed. Further studies are necessary to investigate their full therapeutic potential and to identify ARDS phenotypes which are most likely to benefit from their immunomodulatory effects.

Teicoplanin-A New Use for an Old Drug in the COVID-19 Era?

Teicoplanin is an antibiotic that has been actively used in medical practice since 1986 to treat serious Gram-positive bacterial infections. Due to its efficiency and low cytotoxicity, teicoplanin has also been used for patients with complications, including pediatric and immunocompromised patients. Although teicoplanin is accepted as an antibacterial drug, its action against RNA viruses, including SARS-CoV2, has been proven in vitro. Here, we provide a thorough overview of teicoplanin usage in medicine, based on the current literature. We summarize infection sites treated with teicoplanin, concentrations of the antibiotic in different organs, and side effects. Finally, we summarize all available data about the antiviral activity of teicoplanin. We believe that, due to the extensive experience of teicoplanin usage in clinical settings to treat bacterial infections and its demonstrated activity against SARS-CoV2, teicoplanin could become a drug of choice in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Teicoplanin stops the replication of the virus and at the same time avoids the development of Gram-positive bacterial co-infections.

Linezolid and Its Immunomodulatory Effect: In Vitro and In Vivo Evidence

Recent studies have explored the effects of some antibacterial agents on various aspects of the immune response to infection in addition to their bactericidal effects. As a synthetic oxazolidinone class of antibacterial agent, linezolid (LZD) exhibits activity against a broad range of Gram-positive bacteria. In the present review, we summarized the effects of LZD on the immune response and new approaches that can exploit such interactions for the treatment of bacterial infections. In vitro and pre-clinical evidence demonstrate that LZD suppresses the phagocytic ability, cytokine synthesis, and secretion of immune cells as well as the expressions of immune-related genes at the mRNA level under the stimulation of endotoxin or pathogens. Immunomodulatory effects of LZD can not only reduce the inflammatory damage induced by exaggerated or prolonged release of pro-inflammatory cytokines during infections but can also be applied to alleviate the symptoms of non-infectious inflammatory conditions. Further research is necessary to explore the molecular mechanisms involved and confirm these findings in clinical practice.

Animal Models of Pneumococcal pneumonia

Streptococcus pneumoniae remains the most common bacterial pathogen causing lower respiratory tract infections and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, especially in children and the elderly. Another important aspect related to pneumococcal infections is the persistent rate of penicillin and macrolide resistance. Therefore, animal models have been developed to better understand the pathogenesis of pneumococcal disease and test new therapeutic agents and vaccines. This narrative review will focus on the characteristics of the different animal pneumococcal pneumonia models. The assessment of the different animal models will include considerations regarding pneumococcal strains, microbiology properties, procedures used for bacterial inoculation, pathogenesis, clinical characteristics, diagnosis, treatment, and preventive approaches.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Oxazolidinones

Oxazolidinones are a class of synthetic antimicrobial agents with potent activity against a wide range of multidrug-resistant Gram-positive pathogens including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Oxazolidinones exhibit their antibacterial effects by inhibiting protein synthesis acting on the ribosomal 50S subunit of the bacteria and thus preventing formation of a functional 70S initiation complex. Currently, two oxazolidinones have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration: linezolid and more recently tedizolid. Other oxazolidinones are currently under investigation in clinical trials. These antimicrobial agents exhibit a favourable pharmacokinetic profile with an excellent bioavailability and a good tissue and organ penetration. In-vitro susceptibility studies have shown that oxazolidinones are bacteriostatic against enterococci and staphylococci, and bactericidal for the majority of strains of streptococci. In the context of emergence of resistance to glycopeptides, oxazolidinones have become an effective alternative to vancomycin treatment frequently associated with nephrotoxicity. However, oxazolidinones, and linezolid in particular, are associated with significant adverse events, myelosuppression representing the main unfavourable side effect. More recently, tedizolid has been shown to effectively treat acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. This newer oxazolidinone offers the advantages of once-daily dosing and a better safety profile in healthy volunteer studies (fewer gastrointestinal and haematological side effects). The potential use of tedizolid for other infections that could require longer therapy warrants further studies for positioning this new oxazolidinone in the available antimicrobial armamentarium. Moreover, other oxazolidinones are currently under active investigation.

Comparative efficacy of linezolid and vancomycin for endotracheal tube MRSA biofilms from ICU patients

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of systemic treatment with linezolid (LNZ) versus vancomycin (VAN) on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) burden and eradication in endotracheal tube (ETT) biofilm and ETT cuff from orotracheally intubated patients with MRSA respiratory infection.

METHODS

Prospective observational clinical study was carried out at four European tertiary hospitals. Plasma and endotracheal aspirate (ETA) levels of LNZ and VAN were determined 72 h after treatment initiation through high-performance liquid chromatography or bioassay. LNZ or VAN concentration in the ETT biofilm and MRSA burden and eradication was determined upon extubation. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for LNZ and VAN was assessed by E-test strips (Biomerieux®). Scanning electron microscopy images were obtained, and ETT biofilm thickness was compared between groups.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients, 15 treated with LNZ and 10 with VAN, were included in the study. LNZ presented a significantly higher concentration (μg/mL) than VAN in ETT biofilm (72.8 [1.3-127.1] vs 0.4 [0.4-1.3], p < 0.001), although both drugs achieved therapeutic plasma levels 72 h after treatment initiation. Systemic treatment with LNZ achieved lower ETT cuff MRSA burdens than systemic treatment with VAN. Indeed, LNZ increased the MRSA eradication rate in ETT cuff compared with VAN (LNZ 75%, VAN 20%, p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

In ICU patients with MRSA respiratory infection intubated for long periods, systemic treatment with LNZ obtains a greater beneficial effect than VAN in limiting MRSA burden in ETT cuff.

The Role of Antibiotics in Modulating Virulence in Staphylococcus aureus

Staphylococcus aureus is often involved in severe infections, in which the effects of bacterial virulence factors have great importance. Antistaphylococcal regimens should take into account the different effects of antibacterial agents on the expression of virulence factors and on the host's immune response. A PubMed literature search was performed to select relevant articles on the effects of antibiotics on staphylococcal toxin production and on the host immune response. Information was sorted according to the methods used for data acquisition (bacterial strains, growth models, and antibiotic concentrations) and the assays used for readout generation. The reported mechanisms underlying S. aureus virulence modulation by antibiotics were reviewed. The relevance of in vitro observations is discussed in relation to animal model data and to clinical evidence extracted from case reports and recommendations on the management of toxin-related staphylococcal diseases. Most in vitro data point to a decreased level of virulence expression upon treatment with ribosomally active antibiotics (linezolid and clindamycin), while cell wall-active antibiotics (beta-lactams) mainly increase exotoxin production. In vivo studies confirmed the suppressive effect of clindamycin and linezolid on virulence expression, supporting their utilization as a valuable management strategy to improve patient outcomes in cases of toxin-associated staphylococcal disease.

Does animal model on ventilator-associated pneumonia reflect physiopathology of sepsis mechanisms in humans?

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the leading cause of death in critically ill patients in intensive care units. In the last 20 years, different animal models have been a valuable tool for the study of pathophysiology and phenotypic characteristics of different lung infections observed in humans, becoming an essential link between ''in vitro'' testing and clinical studies. Different animal models have been used to study the mechanism of a deregulated inflammatory response and host tissue damage of sepsis in VAP, as well as different infection parameters such as clinical, physiological, microbiological and pathological facts in several large and small mammals. In addition, the dosage of inflammatory modulators and their consequences in local and systemic inflammation, or even the administration of antibiotics, have been evaluated with very interesting results. Although some bronchial inoculation ways do not resemble the common pathophysiologic mechanisms, the experimental model of VAP induced by the inoculation of high concentrations of pathogens in mechanically ventilated animals is useful for studying the local and systemic responses of sepsis in VAP and it reproduces biological mechanisms such as acute lung injury, distress response, cardiac events and immune modulation comparable with clinical studies.

Linezolid as an eradication agent against assembled methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilms

Methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus(MRSA) biofilms eradicated by linezolid.

European perspective and update on the management of nosocomial pneumonia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus after more than 10 years of experience with linezolid

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is an important cause of antimicrobial-resistant hospital-acquired infections worldwide and remains a public health priority in Europe. Nosocomial pneumonia (NP) involving MRSA often affects patients in intensive care units with substantial morbidity, mortality and associated costs. A guideline-based approach to empirical treatment with an antibacterial agent active against MRSA can improve the outcome of patients with MRSA NP, including those with ventilator-associated pneumonia. New methods may allow more rapid or sensitive diagnosis of NP or microbiological confirmation in patients with MRSA NP, allowing early de-escalation of treatment once the pathogen is known. In Europe, available antibacterial agents for the treatment of MRSA NP include the glycopeptides (vancomycin and teicoplanin) and linezolid (available as an intravenous or oral treatment). Vancomycin has remained a standard of care in many European hospitals; however, there is evidence that it may be a suboptimal therapeutic option in critically ill patients with NP because of concerns about its limited intrapulmonary penetration, increased nephrotoxicity with higher doses, as well as the emergence of resistant strains that may result in increased clinical failure. Linezolid has demonstrated high penetration into the epithelial lining fluid of patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia and shown statistically superior clinical efficacy versus vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA NP in a phase IV, randomized, controlled study. This review focuses on the disease burden and clinical management of MRSA NP, and the use of linezolid after more than 10 years of clinical experience.

Linezolid effects on bacterial toxin production and host immune response: review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Linezolid is active against a broad range of gram-positive pathogens and has the potential to also affect production of bacterial toxins and host immune function.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the evidence for direct effects of linezolid on bacterial toxin synthesis and modulation of host immune responses.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed of the PubMed and OVID databases. Reviews and non-English language articles were excluded. Articles with information on the effect of linezolid on bacterial toxin synthesis and immune responses were selected for further review, and data were summarized.

RESULTS

Substantial in vitro evidence supports effects of linezolid on bacterial toxin production; however, the strength of the evidence and the nature of the effects are mixed. In the case of Staphylococcus aureus, repeated observations support the inhibition of production of certain staphylococcal toxins (Panton-Valentine leukocidin, protein A, and α- and β-hemolysin) by linezolid, whereas only solitary reports indicate inhibition (toxic shock syndrome toxin-1, coagulase, autolysins, and enterotoxins A and B) or stimulation (phenol-soluble modulins) of toxin production by linezolid. In the case of Streptococcus pyogenes, there are solitary reports of linezolid inhibition (protein M, deoxyribonuclease, and streptococcal pyrogenic exotoxins A, B, and F) or stimulation (immunogenic secreted protein 2 and streptococcal inhibitor of complement-mediated lysis) of toxin production, whereas published evidence for effects on streptolysin O production is conflicting. In vitro data are limited, but suggest that linezolid might also have indirect effects on host cytokine expression through inhibition of bacterial production of toxins. In vivo data from preclinical animal studies and a single clinical study in humans are limited and equivocal insofar as a potential role for linezolid in modulating the host inflammatory response; this is due in part to the difficulty in isolating antimicrobial effects and toxin synthesis inhibitory effects of linezolid from any secondary effects on host inflammatory response.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence supports the possibility that linezolid can inhibit, and in some cases stimulate, toxin production in clinically relevant pathogens. However, more research will be needed to determine the potential clinical relevance of those findings for linezolid.

Comparative pharmacodynamics of the new oxazolidinone tedizolid phosphate and linezolid in a neutropenic murine Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia model

Tedizolid phosphate (TR-701) is a novel oxazolidinone prodrug (converted to the active form tedizolid [TR-700]) with potent Staphylococcus aureus activity. The current studies characterized and compared the in vivo pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PD) characteristics of TR-701/TR-700 and linezolid against methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) in the neutropenic murine pneumonia model. The pharmacokinetic properties of both drugs were linear over a dose range of 0.625 to 40 mg/kg of body weight. Protein binding was 30% for linezolid and 85% for TR-700. Mice were infected with one of 11 isolates of S. aureus, including MSSA and community- and hospital-acquired MRSA strains. Each drug was administered by oral-gastric gavage every 12 h (q12h). The dosing regimens ranged from 1.25 to 80 mg/kg/12 h for linezolid and 0.625 to 160 mg/kg/12 h for TR-701. At the start of therapy, mice had 6.24 ± 0.40 log(10) CFU/lungs, which increased to 7.92 ± 1.02 log(10) CFU/lungs in untreated animals over a 24-h period. A sigmoid maximum-effect (E(max)) model was used to determine the antimicrobial exposure associated with net stasis (static dose [SD]) and 1-log-unit reduction in organism relative to the burden at the start of therapy. The static dose pharmacodynamic targets for linezolid and TR-700 were nearly identical, at a free drug (non-protein-bound) area under the concentration-time curve over 24 h in the steady state divided by the MIC (AUC/MIC ratio) of 19 and 20, respectively. The 1-log-unit kill endpoints were also similar, at 46.1 for linezolid and 34.6 for TR-700. The exposure targets were also comparable for both MSSA and MRSA isolates. These dosing goals support further clinical trial examination of TR-701 in MSSA and MRSA pneumonia.

Does linezolid modulate lung innate immunity in a murine model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia?

OBJECTIVES

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is an important cause of mortality among nosocomial infections. Recent investigations suggest that linezolid is superior to vancomycin in achieving clinical cure in patients with nosocomial pneumonia. We hypothesized that linezolid may exhibit anti-inflammatory properties in vivo model of pneumonia.

DESIGN

Prospective interventional study.

SETTING

University affiliated laboratory.

SUBJECTS

BALB/c mice.

INTERVENTIONS

Three groups of BALB/c mice were inoculated with methicillin-resistant S. aureus American Type Culture Collection 33,591 to induce pneumonia. Each group (n = 6) underwent bronchoalveolar lavage at 24 hrs, 48 hrs, and 72 hrs after inoculation after treatment with vancomycin, linezolid, or no antibiotic. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid levels of monocyte chemotactic protein-5 and interleukin-6 were quantified using cytometric bead array. Metalloproteinase-9 was detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and gelatin zymography. Neutrophil apoptosis in bronchoalveolar lavage was assessed by annexin V and 7-aminoactinomycin D staining. Neutrophil activity was determined by myeloperoxidase enzyme activity. Phagocytosis of apoptotic neutrophils by linezolid- vs. vancomycin treated-alveolar macrophages was examined in vitro.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Infected mice had a significant reduction in lung bacterial titers compared with controls (p < .05) after treatment with linezolid or vancomycin. There was no difference in bronchoalveolar lavage levels of monocyte chemotactic protein-5 or interleukin-6 between vancomycin- and linezolid-treated groups. Both antimicrobials were comparable in modulating the expression of matrix metalloproteinase-9 in bronchoalveolar lavage. Neutrophil apoptosis was comparable in both vancomycin- and linezolid-treated groups at all three time points. Vancomycin showed lower myeloperoxidase activity compared with linezolid in the first 24 hrs after inoculation (p = .03), but the difference was undetectable at 48 hrs and 72 hrs. Neither compound had an impact on the process of removal of apoptotic neutrophils by alveolar macrophages.

CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid did not display an advantage over vancomycin in modulating pulmonary innate immune response in a murine model of methicillin-resistant S. aureus pneumonia.

Linezolid vs glycopeptide antibiotics for the treatment of suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is an important cause of nosocomial pneumonia. Societal guidelines suggest linezolid may be the preferred treatment of MRSA nosocomial pneumonia. We investigated the efficacy of linezolid compared with glycopeptide antibiotics (vancomycin or teicoplanin) for nosocomial pneumonia.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of English language, randomized, controlled trials comparing linezolid to glycopeptide antibiotics for suspected MRSA pneumonia in subjects > 12 years of age. A highly sensitive search of PubMed MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases identified relevant studies.

RESULTS

Eight trials encompassing 1,641 subjects met entry criteria. Linezolid was not superior to glycopeptide antibiotics for end points of clinical success (relative risk [RR] linezolid vs glycopeptide, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.97-1.11; P = .28), microbiologic success (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.97-1.31; P = .12), or mortality (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.69-1.18; P = .47). In addition, clinical success in the subgroup of subjects with MRSA-positive respiratory tract culture (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.97-1.57; P = .09) was not significantly different from those without MRSA (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83-1.09; P = .48), P for interaction, 0.07. The risk for adverse events was not different between the two antibiotic classes (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.86-1.07; P = .48).

CONCLUSION

Randomized controlled trials do not support superiority of linezolid over glycopeptide antibiotics for the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia. We recommend that decisions between linezolid or glycopeptide antibiotics for empirical or MRSA-directed therapy of nosocomial pneumonia depend on local availability, antibiotic resistance patterns, preferred routes of delivery, and cost, rather than presumed differences in efficacy.

A veterinary perspective on methicillin-resistant staphylococci

OBJECTIVE

To familiarize the reader with the epidemiology, diagnosis, and infectious and zoonotic potential of methicillin-resistant staphylococci.

DATA SOURCES

Original research publications, scientific reviews and abstracts, case reports, and conference proceedings.

HUMAN DATA SYNTHESIS

Staphylococcus aureus is a common human commensal organism; acquisition of genes encoding an altered penicillin-binding protein confers resistance to beta-lactam antimicrobial drugs. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) are often resistant to non-beta-lactam antimicrobial drugs as well. Originally described as an important cause of nosocomial infection, MRSA colonization and infection are now often identified in humans outside healthcare settings. Like other S. aureus, MRSA may be present without clinical illness. However, when they do cause infection the consequences can be extremely serious.

VETERINARY DATA SYNTHESIS

The major domestic animal species, including pets and livestock, may become contaminated, colonized, or infected with methicillin-resistant staphylococci, including MRSA. Dogs and cats are more likely to be colonized/infected with Staphylococcus pseudintermedius than S. aureus, but this pathogen can acquire genes encoding methicillin resistance (ie, MRSP). Diagnosis of MRSA or MRSP has implications not only for treatment of infected animals, but for potential zoonotic transmission.

CONCLUSIONS

MRSA infection is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in humans. Animals may be contaminated, colonized, or infected with MRSA, with implications for the animal's health and as a potential reservoir for human infection. Staphylococci other than S. aureus may also acquire genes for methicillin resistance, and these species can also result in animal and occasionally human morbidity or mortality.

A European survey of antibiotic management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection: current clinical opinion and practice

Although the epidemiology of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) varies across Europe, healthcare-associated MRSA infections are common in many countries. Despite several national guidelines, the approach to treatment of MRSA infections varies across the continent, and there are multiple areas of management uncertainty for which there is little clinical evidence to guide practice. A faculty, convened to explore some of these areas, devised a survey that was used to compare the perspectives of infection specialists from across Europe on the management of MRSA infections with those of the faculty specialists. The survey instrument, a web-based questionnaire, was sent to 3840 registered delegates of the 19th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, held in April 2009. Of the 501 (13%) respondents to the survey, 84% were infection/microbiology specialists and 80% were from Europe. This article reports the survey results from European respondents, and shows a broad range of opinion and practice on a variety of issues pertaining to the management of minor and serious MRSA infections, such as pneumonia, bacteraemia, and skin and soft tissue infections. The issues include changing epidemiology, when and when not to treat, choice of treatment, and duration and route of treatment. The survey identified areas where practice can be improved and where further research is needed, and also identified areas of pan-European consensus of opinion that could be applied to European guidelines for the management of MRSA infection.

Management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Staphylococcus aureus, and particularly methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has become an increasingly important etiology of pneumonia, both in healthcare and community settings. Associated with highest morbidity, mortality and costs in public health, it represents a major challenge for the management of this group of patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

MRSA is one of the most common pathogens of ventilator associated pneumonia, whereas its estimated incidence for hospital acquired pneumonia, healthcare associated pneumonia and community acquired pneumonia has risen in the past decades. Although vancomycin at standard doses remains as the mainstay for its treatment, the increasing rate of treatment failure has prompted other strategies of use (more frequent administration, continuous infusion, combination therapy), and the use of newer antimicrobials, particularly linezolid, with pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles which produce promisingly improved clinical results.

SUMMARY

Overall, MRSA is an important cause of pneumonia; optimal management strategies for improving morbidity and mortality are still under development.

A comparison of linezolid with glycopeptides in severe MRSA pneumonia

Evaluation of: Luna CM, Bruno DA, García-Morato J et al. Effect of linezolid compared with glycopeptides in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus severe pneumonia in piglets. Chest 135(6), 1564-1571 (2009). Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as a major pathogen in nosocomial infections and accounts for a large proportion of nosocomial pneumonia. However, there are limited antibiotics available for the treatment of this serious and potentially lethal infection. Until recently, the only effective antibiotic was vancomycin, but the oxazolidinones, such as linezolid, have been shown to be a valuable addition to the arsenal of antimicrobial agents that can be used for MRSA pneumonia. Clinical trials have been conducted to compare vancomycin and linezolid head-to-head in pneumonia and, in post hoc subgroup analyses, showed that linezolid use was associated with improved survival. The ensuing debate over these results was dominated by two opinions; there were those who speculated on the mechanism by which linezolid achieved this benefit, namely attributing it to pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics, and others who criticized the methodology of the studies and questioned the validity of the results altogether. This study by Luna and colleagues was designed with several goals in mind. The first was to attempt to generate an animal model of MRSA pneumonia in piglets by duplicating techniques used in animal models of Gram-negative pneumonia. Then they studied the effect of three antibiotics (vancomycin, linezolid and teicoplanin) on outcomes in the same model, while simultaneously measuring antibiotic levels in the serum, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and lung tissue, in an attempt to attribute differences in survival to pharmacological properties of the drugs used. Their results showed a survival benefit only for linezolid, despite the fact that all three antibiotics had levels above MIC in all the compartments sampled, leading them to speculate that linezolid may have improved outcomes by mechanisms not directly related to its antimicrobial actions.