Predicting and preventing antimicrobial resistance utilizing pharmacodynamics: Part I gram positive bacteria

Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism and Toxicology

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 267-280

  Linder, Kristin E ^a   Nicolau, David P ^a   Nailor, Michael D ^a,b  

^a HARTFORD HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

Author keywords

Daptomycin; linezolid; macrolides; quinolones; vancomycin

Indexed keywords

ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT;

ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; ENTEROCOCCUS; IN VITRO STUDY; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; NONHUMAN; PHARMACODYNAMICS; REVIEW; STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; STREPTOCOCCUS PNEUMONIAE; ANIMAL; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EFFECTS; GENETICS; GRAM POSITIVE BACTERIUM; GRAM-POSITIVE BACTERIAL INFECTIONS; HUMAN; MICROBIOLOGY; MUTATION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG RESISTANCE, BACTERIAL; GRAM-POSITIVE BACTERIA; GRAM-POSITIVE BACTERIAL INFECTIONS; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; MUTATION;

EID: 84959082873     PISSN: 17425255     EISSN: 17447607     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1517/17425255.2016.1141197     Document Type: Review

References (86)

1. Peters NK, Dixon DM, Holland SM, et al. The research agenda of the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases for antimicrobial resistance. J Infect Dis. 2008; 197 (8): 1087-1093.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Antibiotic resistance threats in the United States, 2014. Atlanta (GA): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2013.
3. Roberts RR, Hota B, Ahmad I, et al. Hospital and societal costs of antimicrobial-resistant infections in a Chicago teaching hospital: implications for antibiotic stewardship. Clin Infect Dis. 2009; 49 (8): 1175-1184.
4. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; twenty-fifth informational supplement. CLSI document M100S25. Wayne (PA): Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2015.
5. Andersson DI. Improving predictions of the risk of resistance development against new and old antibiotics. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015; 21: 894-898. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2015.05.012.
6. Martínez JL, Baquero F, Andersson DI. Beyond serial passages: new methods for predicting the emergence of resistance to novel antibiotics. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2011; 11: 439-445.
7. Liu A, Tran L, Becket E, et al. Antibiotic sensitivity profiles determines with an Escherichia coli gene knockout collection: generating an antibiotic bar code. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010; 54: 1393-1403.
8. Alvarez-Ortega C, Wiegand I, et al. The intrinsic resistome of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to β-lactams. Virulence. 2011; 2: 144-146.
9. Fajardo A, Martinez-Martin N, Mercadillo M, et al. The neglected intrinsic resistome of bacterial pathogens. PLoS ONE. 2008; 3: e1619.
10. Novais A, Comas I, Baquero F, et al. Evolutionary trajectories of beta-lactamase CTX-M-1 cluster enzymes: predicting antibiotic resistance. PLoS Pathog. 2010; 6: e1000735.
11. Novais A, Canton R, Coque TM, et al. Mutational events in cefotaximase extended-spectrum beta-lactamases of the CTX-M-1 cluster involved in the ceftazidime resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008; 52: 2377-2382.
12. Bjorkholm B, Sjolund M, Falk PG, et al. Mutation frequency and biologic cost of antibiotic resistance in Helicobacter pylori. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001; 98: 14607-14612.
13. Nagaev I, Bjorkman J, Andersson DI, et al. Biologic cost and compensatory evolution in fusidic acid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Mol Microbiol. 2001; 40: 433-439.
14. Shcherbakov D, Akbergenov R, Matt T, et al. Directed mutagenesis of Mycobacterium smegmatis 16S rRNA to reconstruct the in-vivo evolution of aminoglycoside resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Mol Microbiol. 2010; 77: 830-840.
15. Blondeau JM. New concepts in antimicrobial susceptibility testing: the mutant prevention concentration and mutant selection window approach. Vet Dermatol. 2009; 20: 383-396.
16. Dong Y, Zhao X, Domagala J, et al. Effect of fluoroquinolone concentration on selection of resistant mutants of Mycobacterium bovis BCG and Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1999; 43: 1756-1758.
17. Firsov AA, Zinner SH, Lubenko IY. Ch 3 in antimicrobial pharmacodynamics in theory and clinical practice. Nightingale CH, Murakawa T, Ambrose PG., editors. New York (NY): Marcel Decker; 2002.
18. Campion JJ, McNamara PJ, Evans ME. Evolution of ciprofloxacin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in in vitro pharmacokinetic environments. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004; 48: 4733-4744.
19. Blaser J, Stone BB, Groner MC, et al. Comparative study with enoxacin and netilmicin in a pharmacodynamics model to determine importance of ratio of antibiotic peak concentration to MIC for bactericidal activity and emergence of resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1985; 15: 125-130.
20. Firsov AA, Vostrov SN, Lubenko IY, et al. In vitro pharmacodynamic evaluation of the mutant selection window hypothesis using four fluoroquinolones against Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003; 47: 1604-1613.
21. Marchbanks CR, McKiel JR, Gilbert DH, et al. Dose ranging and fractionation of intravenous ciprofloxacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro model of infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993; 37: 1756-1763.
22. Preston SL, Drusano GL, Berman AL, et al. Pharmacodynamics of levofloxacin: a new paradigm for early clinical trials. JAMA. 1998; 279: 125-129.
23. Baquero FM, Negri M-C, Morosini M-I, et al. Antibiotic-selective environments. Clin Infect Dis. 1998; 27: S5-S11.
24. Drlica K. The mutant selection window and antimicrobial resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003; 52: 11-17.
25. Zhau X, Drlica K. Restricting the selection of antibiotic-resistant mutants: a general strategy derived from fluoroquinolone studies. Clin Infect Dis. 2001; 33: S147-S156.
26. Firsov AA, Smirnova MV, Lubenko, et al. Testing the mutant selection window hypothesis with Staphylococcus auerus exposed to daptomycin and vancomyin in an in vitro dynamic model. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006; 58: 1185-1192.
27. Zhu Y-L, Hu L-F, Mei Q, et al. Testing the mutant selection window in rabbits infected with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus exposed to vancomycin. J Antimicrob Chemotherapy. 2012; 67: 2700-2706.
28. Mei Q, Ye Y, Zhu Y-L, 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.
29. Sader HS, Fey PD, Fish DN, et al. Evaluation of vancomycin and daptomycin potency trends (MIC creep) against methicillin-resistant Staphylococus aureus isolates collected in nine U.S. medical centers from 2002 to 2006. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009; 53 (10): 4127-4132.
30. Alos J-I, Garcia-Canas A, Garcia-Hierro P, et al. Vancomycin MICs did not creep in Staphylococcus aureus isolates from 2002 to 2006 in a setting with low vancomycin usage. J Antimicrob Cehmother. 2008; 62: 773-775.
31. Ho P-L, Lo P-Y, Chow K-H, et al. Vancomycin MIC creep in MRSA isolates from 1997 to 2008 in a healthcare region in Hong Kong. J Infect. 2010; 60 (2): 140-145.
32. Steinkraus G, White R, Friedrich L. Vancomycin MIC creep in non-vancomycin intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA), vancomycin susceptible clinical methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) blood isolates from 2001-05. J Antimicrobial Chemother. 2007; 60: 788-794.
33. Lentino JR, Narita M, Yu VL. New antimicrobial agents as therapy for resistant gram-positive cocci. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2008; 27: 3-15.
34. Bayer AS, Schneider T, Sahl H-G. Mechanisms of daptomycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus: role of the cell membrane and cell wall. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2013; 1277: 139-158.
35. Cui L, Tominaga E, Neoh H, et al. Correlation between reduced daptomycin susceptibility and vancomycin resistance in vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006; 50: 1079-1082.
36. Bhalodi, Hagihara, Nicolau, et al. In vitro pharmacodynamics of human simulated exposures of ceftaroline and daptomycin against MRSA, hVISA, and VISA with and without prior vancomycin exposure. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014; 58 (2): 672-677.
37. Wilson P, Andrews JA, Charlesworth R, et al. Linezolid resistance in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003; 51: 186-188.
38. Gales AC, Sader HS, Andrade SS. Emergence of linezolid-resistance Staphylococcus aureus during treatment of pulmonary infection in a patient with cystic fibrosis. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2006; 27 (4): 300-302.
39. Rayner CR, Forrest A, Meagher, et al. Clinical pharmacodynamics of linezolid in seriously ill patients treated in a compassionate use programme. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2003; 42: 1411-1423.
40. LaPlante KL, Rybak MJ. Impact of high-inoculum Staphylococcus aureus on the activities of nafcillin, vancomycin, linezolid, and daptomycin, alone and in combination with gentamicin, in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004; 48: 4665-4672.
41. Firsov, Golikova, Strukova, et al. In vitro resistance studies with bacteria that exhibit low mutation frequencies: prediction of "antimutant" linezolid concentrations using a mixed inoculum containing both susceptible and resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015; 59: 1014-1019.
42. Streit JM, Jones RN, Sader HS. Daptomycin activity and spectrum: a worldwide sample of 6737 clinical gram-positive organisms. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004; 53: 669-674.
43. Kalil AC, Van Schooneveld TC, Fey PD, et al. Association between vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and mortality among patients with Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections. JAMA. 2014; 312: 1552-1564.
44. Farrell DJ, Castanheira M, Mendes RE, et al. In vitro activity of ceftaroline against multidrug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae: a review of published studies in the AWARE surveillance program (2008-2010). Clin Infect Dis. 2012; 55: S206-S214.
45. Hooper DC. New uses for new and old quinolones the challenge of resistance. Clin Infect Dis. 2000; 30: 243-254.
46. Ho PL, Que TL, Tsang DN, et al. Emergence of fluoroquinolone resistance among multiply resistant strains of Streptococcus pneumoniae in Hong Kong. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1999; 43: 1310-1313.
47. Chen DK, McGeer A, de Azavedo JC, et al. Decreased susceptibility of Streptococcus pneumoniae to fluoroquinolones in Canada. Canadian Bacterial Surveillience Network. New Engl J Med. 1999; 341: 233-239.
48. Goldsmith CE, Moore JE, Murphy PG, et al. Increased incidence of ciprofloxacin resistance in penicillin-resistant pneumococci in Northern Ireland. J Antimicrob Cehmother. 1998; 41: 420-421.
49. Linares J, De La Campa AG, Pallares R. Fluoroquinolone resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae. New Engl J Med. 1999; 341: 1546-1547.
50. Doern GV, Heilmann KP, Huynh HK, et al. Antimicrobial resistance among clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae in the United States during 1999-2000, including a comparison of resistance rates since 1994-1995. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001; 45: 1721-1729.
51. Sahm DF, Peterson DE, Critchley IA, et al. Analysis of ciprofloxacin activity against Streptococcus pneumoniae after 10 years of use in the United States. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000; 44: 2521-2524.
52. Sahm DF, Karlowsky JA, Kelly LJ, et al. Need for annual surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae in the United States: 2-year longitudinal analysis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001; 45: 1037-1042.
53. Centers for Disease Control. Resistance of Streptococcus pneumoniae to fluoroquinolones-United States, 1995-1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2001; 50: 800-804.
54. Homma T, Hori T, Sugimori, et al. Pharmacodynamic assessment based on mutant prevention concentrations of fluoroquinolones to prevent the emergence of resistant mutants of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007; 51: 3810-3815.
55. Croisier D, Chavanet P, Lequeu C, et al. Efficacy and pharmacodynamics of simulated human-like treatment with levofloxacin on experimental pneumonia induced with penicillin-resistant pneumococci with various susceptibilities to fluoroquinolones. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2002; 50: 349-360.
56. Allen GP, Kaatz GW, Rybak MJ. Activities of mutant prevention concentration-Targeted moxifloxacin and levofloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003; 47: 2606-2614.
57. Thorburn CE, Edwards DI. The effect of pharmacokinetics on the bactericidal activity of ciprofloxacin and sparfloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae and the emergence of resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2001; 48: 15-22.
58. Zinner SH, Lubenko IY, Gilbert D, et al. Emergency of resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae in an in vitro dynamic model that simulates moxifloxacin concentrations inside and outside the mutant selection window: related changes in susceptibility, resistance frequency and bacterial killing. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003; 52: 616-622.
59. Florea NR, Tessier PR, Zhang C, et al. Pharmacodynamics of moxifloxacin and levofloxacin at simulated epithelial lining fluid drug concentrations against Streptococcus pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002; 46: 522-524.
60. DeRyke AC, Du X, Nicolau DP. Evolution of bacterial kill when modelling the bronchopulmonary pharmacokinetic profile of moxifloxacin and levofloxacin against par-C containing isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006; 58: 601-609.
61. Zhanel GG, Palatnick L, Nichol KA, et al. Antimicrobial resistance in respiratory tract Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates: results of the Canadian Respiratory Organism Susceptibility Study, 1997 to 2002. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2003; 47: 1867-1874.
62. Blondeau JM, Hansen G, Metzler KL, et al. The role of PK/PD parameters to avoid selection and increase of resistance: mutant prevention concentration. J Chemother. 2004; 16: 1-9.
63. Blondeau JM, Metzler KL, Hedlin P, et al. Comparison of the mutant prevention concentration of gatifloxacin, garenoxacin, gemifloxacin, levofloxacin, and mocifloxacin against clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae collected prior to (1994-97) and after 1997 (1997-2003). Presented at: the 14th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases; May 2004; Prague, Czech Republic
64. Kastner U, Guggenbichler JP. Influence of macrolide antibiotics on promotion of resistance in the oral flora of children. Infection. 2001; 29: 251-256.
65. Davidson RJ, Chen CCK, Doern GV, et al. Macrolide resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae in Canada: correlation with azithromycin use. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2003; 9: 240-241.
66. Metzler K, Drlica K, Blondeau JM. Minimal inhibitory concentration and mutant prevention concentrations of azithromycin, clarithromycin and erythromycin for clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013; 68: 631-635.
67. Cafini F, Aguilar L, Sevillano D, et al. Decrease in bacterial load versus resistance selection of pneumococcal subpopulations by beta-lactam physiological concentrations over time: an in vitro pharmacodynamic simulation. Microb Drug Resist. 2008; 14 (1): 13-21.
68. Yu VL, Chiou CC, Feldman C, et al. An international prospective study of pneumococcal bacteremia: correlation with in vitro resistance, antibiotics administered, and clinical outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2003; 37 (2): 230-237.
69. Burleson BS, Ritchie DJ, Micek ST, et al. Enterococcus faecalis resistant to linezolid: case series and review of the literature. Pharmacother. 2004; 24: 1225-1231.
70. Gonzales RD, Schreckenberger PC, Graham MB, et al. Infections due to vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium resistant to linezolid. Lancet. 2001; 357: 1179.
71. Drago L, Nicola L, De Vecchi E, et al. A comparative in-vitro evaluation of resistance selection after exposure to teicoplanin, vancomycin, linezolid and quinupristin-dalfopristin in Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus spp. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2008; 14: 608-611.
72. Kaatz GW, Seo SM. In vitro activities of oxazolidinone compounds U-100592 and U-100766 against Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996; 40: 799-801.
73. Zurenko GE, Yagi BH, Schaadt RD, et al. In vitro activities of U-100592 and U-100766, novel oxazolidinone antibacterial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996; 40: 839-845.
74. Prystowsky J, Siddiqui F, Chosay J, et al. Resistance to linezolid: characteristics of mutations in rRNA and comparison of their occurrences in vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001; 45: 2154-2156.
75. Allen GP, Cha RC, Rybak MJ, et al. In vitro activities of quinupristin-dalfopristin and cefepime, alone and in combination with various antimicrobials, against multidrug-resistant staphylococci and enterococci in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002; 46: 2606-2612.
76. Boak LM, Li J, Rayner CR, et al. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic factors influencing emergence of resistance to linezolid in an in vitro model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007; 51 (4): 1287-1292.
77. Zinner SH, Gilbert D, Lubenko IY, et al. Selection of linezolid-resistant Enterococcus faecium in an in vitro dynamic model: protective effect of doxycycline. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008; 61: 629-635.
78. Allen GP, Bierman BC. In vitro analysis of resistance selection by linezolid in vancomycin-susceptible and -resistant Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2009; 34 (1): 21-24.
79. Scheetz MH, Knechtel SA, Postelnick MJ, et al. Differences in clinical outcomes in patients with vancomycin-resistant enterococci according to linezolid susceptibility. Pharmacother. 2010; 30 (12): 1221-1228.
80. Sader HS, Jones RN. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-positive bacteria isolated from US medical centers: results of the Daptomycin Surveillance Program (2007-2008). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2009; 65 (2): 158-162.
81. Kamboj M, Cohen N, Gilhuley K, et al. Emergence of daptomycin-resistant VRE: experience of a single institution. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011; 32 (4): 391-394.
82. Hall AD, Steed ME, Arias CA, et al. Evaluation of standard- And high-dose daptomycin versus linezolid against vancomycin-resistant enterococcus isolates in an in vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model with simulated endocardial vegetations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012; 56 (6): 3174-3180.
83. Arias CA, Panesso D, McGrath DM, et al. Genetic basis for in vivo daptomycin resistance in enterococci. New Engl J Med. 2011; 365: 892-900.
84. Kristich CJ, Rice LB, Arias CA. Enterococcal infection-Treatment and antibiotic resistance. In: Gilmore MS, Clewell DB, Ike Y, et al., editors. Enterococci: from commensals to leading causes of drug resistant infection [Internet]. Boston: Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary; 2014 Feb 6.
85. Streit JM, Flamm RK, Ross JE, et al. Tracking linezolid antimicrobial activity and resistance in North America: results from the LEADER program for 2013. Presented at: the Infectious Disease Society of America ID Week; Oct 2014; Philadelphia, PA.
86. Mendes RE, Farrel DJ, Sader HS, et al. Update of the telavancin activity in vitro tested against a worldwide collection of Gram-positive clinical isolates (2013), when applying the revised susceptibility testing method. Diagn Microbiol and Infect Dis. 2015; 81: 275-279.