1887

Abstract

Purpose. Glycopeptides are widely used for the treatment of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections. Although difficult to detect, isolates with reduced (GISA), hetero (hGISA) or complete (GRSA) resistance to glycopeptides are increasingly reported. Optimal therapy for such strains is unknown. We compared the in vitro and in vivo activity of tedizolid (TED), a recently licensed oxazolidonone, with vancomycin (VAN) and teicoplanin (TEIC) combined with fusidic acid (FD) or rifampicin (RIF) against S. aureus (SA) with reduced susceptibility to glycopeptides.

Methods. Susceptibility was determined for six (GISA, hGISA and GRSA) reference strains and 72 clinical MRSA isolates screened for hGISA/GISA-like phenotypes. Synergy and bactericidal activity were assessed using chequerboard and time-kill assays. The G. mellonella wax moth caterpillar model was used to measure the activity of TED and the combinations in vivo.

Results. Glycopeptide MICs (VAN/TEIC) ranged from 0.5–8/4 and 0.125–1 for TED. No significant synergy was noted when VAN/TEIC were combined with either RIF or FD. Time-kill assays confirmed that TED was bacteriostatic but superior to VAN and TEIC against GISA strains. In G. mellonella TED was more effective than TEIC monotherapy versus GISA strains. The combination of TEIC with RIF was the most effective combination overall, both in vitro and in vivo.

Conclusions. TED had good in vitro activity versus MRSA including those with reduced susceptibility to glycopeptides. Although bacteriostatic, it was effective in the G. mellonella model and superior to TEIC in the treatment of GISA. Although this supports the use of TED for MRSA and GISA, the TEIC/RIF combination also warrants further study.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000671
2018-01-04
2019-10-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/67/2/265.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000671&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Hiramatsu K, Kayayama Y, Matsuo M, Aiba Y, Saito M et al. Vancomycin-intermediate resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. J Glob Antimicrob Resist 2014; 2: 213– 224 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Gardete S, Tomasz A. Mechanisms of vancomycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Invest 2014; 124: 2836– 2840 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Mei Q, Ye Y, Zhu YL, Cheng J, Yang HF et al. Use of Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate the development of vancomycin resistance in meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2015; 45: 652– 656 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Jacob JT, Diazgranados CA. High vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and clinical outcomes in adults with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: a meta-analysis. Int J Infect Dis 2013; 17: e93-e100 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Gomes DM, Ward KE, Laplante KL. Clinical implications of vancomycin heteroresistant and intermediately susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Pharmacotherapy 2015; 35: 424– 432 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Gould FK, Denning DW, Elliott TS, Foweraker J, Perry JD et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and antibiotic treatment of endocarditis in adults: a report of the working party of the British society for antimicrobial chemotherapy. J Antimicrob Chemother 2012; 67: 269– 289 [Crossref]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Thwaites GE. United Kingdom Clinical Infection Research Group (UKCIRG) The management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in the United Kingdom and Vietnam: a multi-centre evaluation. PLoS One 2010; 5: e14170 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Thwaites GE, Edgeworth JD, Gkrania-Klotsas E, Kirby A, Tilley R et al. Clinical management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. Lancet Infect Dis 2011; 11: 208– 222 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Mendes RE, Hogan PA, Jones RN, Sader HS, Flamm RK. Surveillance for linezolid resistance via the Zyvox® Annual Appraisal of Potency and Spectrum (ZAAPS) programme (2014): evolving resistance mechanisms with stable susceptibility rates. J Antimicrob Chemother 2016; 71: 1860– 1865 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Diep BA, Afasizheva A, Le HN, Kajikawa O, Matute-Bello G et al. Effects of linezolid on suppressing in vivo production of staphylococcal toxins and improving survival outcomes in a rabbit model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus necrotizing pneumonia. J Infect Dis 2013; 208: 75– 82 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Wunderink RG, Rello J, Cammarata SK, Croos-Dabrera RV, Kollef MH. Linezolid vs vancomycin: analysis of two double-blind studies of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia. Chest 2003; 124: 1789– 1797 [PubMed] [Crossref]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Wang Y, Zou Y, Xie J, Wang T, Zheng X et al. Linezolid versus vancomycin for the treatment of suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia: a systematic review employing meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2015; 71: 107– 115 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Yue J, Dong BR, Yang M, Chen X, Wu T et al. Linezolid versus vancomycin for skin and soft tissue infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 1: CD008056 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Pfaller MA, Flamm RK, Jones RN, Farrell DJ, Mendes RE. Activities of tedizolid and linezolid determined by the reference broth microdilution method against 3,032 Gram-positive bacterial isolates collected in Asia-Pacific, Eastern Europe, and Latin American Countries in 2014. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2016; 60: 5393– 5399 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Moellering RC. Tedizolid: a novel oxazolidinone for Gram-positive infections. Clin Infect Dis 2014; 58: S1– S3 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cafiso V, Bertuccio T, Spina D, Purrello S, Blandino G et al. A novel δ-hemolysis screening method for detecting heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus. J Clin Microbiol 2012; 50: 1742– 1744 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Howden BP, Johnson PD, Ward PB, Stinear TP, Davies JK. Isolates with low-level vancomycin resistance associated with persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 3039– 3047 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Yusof A, Engelhardt A, Karlsson A, Bylund L, Vidh P et al. Evaluation of a new Etest vancomycin-teicoplanin strip for detection of glycopeptide-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (GISA), in particular, heterogeneous GISA. J Clin Microbiol 2008; 46: 3042– 3047 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Walsh TR, Bolmström A, Qwärnström A, Ho P, Wootton M et al. Evaluation of current methods for detection of staphylococci with reduced susceptibility to glycopeptides. J Clin Microbiol 2001; 39: 2439– 2444 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Wootton M, Howe RA, Hillman R, Walsh TR, Bennett PM et al. A modified population analysis profile (PAP) method to detect hetero-resistance to vancomycin in Staphylococcus aureus in a UK hospital. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001; 47: 399– 403 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Peleg AY, Monga D, Pillai S, Mylonakis E, Moellering RC et al. Reduced susceptibility to vancomycin influences pathogenicity in Staphylococcus aureus infection. J Infect Dis 2009; 199: 532– 536 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hornsey M, Wareham DW. In vivo efficacy of glycopeptide-colistin combination therapies in a Galleria mellonella model of Acinetobacter baumannii infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2011; 55: 3534– 3537 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Chan LC, Basuino L, Dip EC, Chambers HF. Comparative efficacies of tedizolid phosphate, vancomycin, and daptomycin in a rabbit model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2015; 59: 3252– 3256 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Zurenko G, Bien P, Bensaci M, Patel HN, Thorne G. Use of linezolid susceptibility test results as a surrogate for the susceptibility of Gram-positive pathogens to tedizolid, a novel oxazolidinone. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 2014; 13: 46 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lenhard JR, Brown T, Rybak MJ, Meaney CJ, Norgard NB et al. Sequential evolution of vancomycin-intermediate resistance alters virulence in Staphylococcus aureus: pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets for vancomycin exposure. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2015; 60: 1584– 1591 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Flanagan S, Passarell J, Lu Q, Fiedler-Kelly J, Ludwig E et al. Tedizolid population pharmacokinetics, exposure response, and target attainment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2014; 58: 6462– 6470 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Barber KE, Smith JR, Raut A, Rybak MJ. Evaluation of tedizolid against Staphylococcus aureus and enterococci with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin, daptomycin or linezolid. J Antimicrob Chemother 2016; 71: 152– 155 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Matsuo M, Hishinuma T, Katayama Y, Cui L, Kapi M et al. Mutation of RNA polymerase beta subunit (rpoB) promotes hVISA-to-VISA phenotypic conversion of strain Mu3. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2011; 55: 4188– 4195 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Thwaites G, Auckland C, Barlow G, Cunningham R, Davies G et al. Adjunctive rifampicin to reduce early mortality from Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2012; 13: 241 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000671
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000671
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplementary File 1

PDF
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error