Literature DB >> 20566766

Fusidic acid resistance rates and prevalence of resistance mechanisms among Staphylococcus spp. isolated in North America and Australia, 2007-2008.

Mariana Castanheira1, Amy A Watters, Jan M Bell, John D Turnidge, Ronald N Jones.   

Abstract

Among 4,167 Staphylococcus aureus and 790 coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CoNS; not S. saprophyticus) isolates collected consecutively from North American and Australian hospitals, only 87 (1.7% overall) isolates displayed a fusidic acid (FA; also known as CEM-102) MIC of > or = 2 microg/ml (FA resistance). These strains were further evaluated with a multiplex PCR to amplify the acquired resistance genes fusB, fusC, and fusD. Mutations in fusA and fusE were evaluated in all isolates showing an absence of acquired resistance genes and/or showing FA MIC values of > or = 64 microg/ml. S. aureus resistance rates were very low in the United States (0.3%) and were higher in Canada and Australia (7.0% for both countries). Among CoNS isolates, FA resistance rates were significantly more elevated than that for S. aureus (7.2 to 20.0%; the highest rates were in Canada). All 52 (41 CoNS) FA-resistant isolates from the United States showed FA MIC results of < or = 64 microg/ml, and 7 of 11 S. aureus isolates carried fusC. CoNS strains from the United States carried fusB or fusC. In Canada, fusB and fusC occurrences were similar among S. aureus and CoNS isolates, and modestly elevated FA MIC values were observed (all MIC results were < or = 32 microg/ml). Isolates from Australia showed MIC values ranging from 2 to 32 microg/ml, and S. aureus isolates were predominantly fusC positive. fusA mutations were detected in only three S. aureus isolates, conferring FA MIC values of 2 to 8 microg/ml. Target mutations have been considered the primary FA resistance mechanism among Staphylococcus spp.; however, acquired resistance genes appear to have a dominant role in resistance against this older antimicrobial agent. In summary, this study shows that acquired genes are highly prevalent among FA-resistant strains (>90%) in three nations with distinct or absence (United States) of fusidic acid clinical use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20566766      PMCID: PMC2934946          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01390-09

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  15 in total

Review 1.  Resistance to fusidic acid.

Authors:  J Turnidge; P Collignon
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 5.283

2.  Correlation of MIC methods and tentative interpretive criteria for disk diffusion susceptibility testing using NCCLS methodology for fusidic acid.

Authors:  R Skov; N Frimodt-Møller; F Espersen
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.803

3.  Molecular basis of fusB-mediated resistance to fusidic acid in Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Alexander John O'Neill; Ian Chopra
Journal:  Mol Microbiol       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.501

Review 4.  Dumb and dumber--the potential waste of a useful antistaphylococcal agent: emerging fusidic acid resistance in Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Benjamin P Howden; M Lindsay Grayson
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Rapid detection and identification of metallo-beta-lactamase-encoding genes by multiplex real-time PCR assay and melt curve analysis.

Authors:  Rodrigo E Mendes; Katia A Kiyota; Jussimara Monteiro; Mariana Castanheira; Soraya S Andrade; Ana C Gales; Antonio C C Pignatari; Sergio Tufik
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2006-11-08       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Genetic basis of resistance to fusidic acid in staphylococci.

Authors:  A J O'Neill; F McLaws; G Kahlmeter; A S Henriksen; I Chopra
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2007-02-26       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  A fusidic acid-resistant epidemic strain of Staphylococcus aureus carries the fusB determinant, whereas fusA mutations are prevalent in other resistant isolates.

Authors:  Alexander J O'Neill; Anders R Larsen; Anne S Henriksen; Ian Chopra
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Wild-type MIC distributions and epidemiological cutoff values for the echinocandins and Candida spp.

Authors:  M A Pfaller; L Boyken; R J Hollis; J Kroeger; S A Messer; S Tendolkar; R N Jones; J Turnidge; D J Diekema
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Molecular analysis of fusidic acid resistance in Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Silke Besier; Albrecht Ludwig; Volker Brade; Thomas A Wichelhaus
Journal:  Mol Microbiol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.501

10.  Fusidic acid-resistant mutants define three regions in elongation factor G of Salmonella typhimurium.

Authors:  U Johanson; D Hughes
Journal:  Gene       Date:  1994-05-27       Impact factor: 3.688

View more
  38 in total

1.  Safety and immunogenicity of a novel Staphylococcus aureus vaccine: results from the first study of the vaccine dose range in humans.

Authors:  Clayton Harro; Robert Betts; Walter Orenstein; Eun-Jeong Kwak; Howard E Greenberg; Matthew T Onorato; Jon Hartzel; Joy Lipka; Mark J DiNubile; Nicholas Kartsonis
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2010-10-13

Review 2.  Investigational antimicrobial agents of 2013.

Authors:  Michael J Pucci; Karen Bush
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 26.132

Review 3.  Target protection as a key antibiotic resistance mechanism.

Authors:  Daniel N Wilson; Vasili Hauryliuk; Gemma C Atkinson; Alex J O'Neill
Journal:  Nat Rev Microbiol       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 60.633

Review 4.  Current and Emerging Topical Antibacterials and Antiseptics: Agents, Action, and Resistance Patterns.

Authors:  Deborah A Williamson; Glen P Carter; Benjamin P Howden
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 26.132

5.  In vitro activity of fusidic acid (CEM-102, sodium fusidate) against Staphylococcus aureus isolates from cystic fibrosis patients and its effect on the activities of tobramycin and amikacin against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Burkholderia cepacia.

Authors:  Pamela McGhee; Catherine Clark; Kim Credito; Linda Beachel; Glenn A Pankuch; Peter C Appelbaum; Klaudia Kosowska-Shick
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 6.  Coagulase-negative staphylococci.

Authors:  Karsten Becker; Christine Heilmann; Georg Peters
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 26.132

7.  A central interdomain protein joint in elongation factor G regulates antibiotic sensitivity, GTP hydrolysis, and ribosome translocation.

Authors:  Cristina Ticu; Marat Murataliev; Roxana Nechifor; Kevin S Wilson
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2011-04-29       Impact factor: 5.157

8.  Fusidic acid resistance determinants in Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates.

Authors:  Hsiao-Jan Chen; Wei-Chun Hung; Sung-Pin Tseng; Jui-Chang Tsai; Po-Ren Hsueh; Lee-Jene Teng
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2010-09-20       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  In vitro activity of CEM-102 (fusidic acid) against prevalent clones and resistant phenotypes of Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  D F Sahm; J Deane; C M Pillar; P Fernandes
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2013-06-17       Impact factor: 5.191

10.  Activity of Fusidic Acid Tested against Staphylococci Isolated from Patients in U.S. Medical Centers in 2014.

Authors:  David J Farrell; Rodrigo E Mendes; Mariana Castanheira; Ronald N Jones
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.