Literature DB >> 25424036

Testing the mutant selection window hypothesis in vitro and in vivo with Staphylococcus aureus exposed to fosfomycin.

Q Mei1, Y Ye, Y-L Zhu, J Cheng, X Chang, Y-Y Liu, H-R Li, J-B Li.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to test the mutant selection window (MSW) hypothesis in vitro and in vivo with Staphylococcus aureus exposed to fosfomycin. With the in vitro time-kill studies, S. aureus ATCC 29213 [with a minimal concentration that inhibits colony formation by 99% (MIC99) of 2.2 μg/mL and a mutant prevention concentration (MPC) of 57.6 μg/mL] lost fosfomycin susceptibility at antibiotic concentrations (2×, 4×, and 8× MIC) that are between the lower and upper boundaries of the MSW. In the tissue-cage model, S. aureus was exposed to fosfomycin pharmacokinetics at concentrations below the MIC99, between the MIC99 and the MPC, and above the MPC, respectively. Changes in susceptibility and counts of total and resistant viable bacteria were monitored in tissue-cage fluid obtained daily. However, the selection of resistant mutants was not observed during antibacterial treatment and 48 h after the termination of fosfomycin treatment, regardless of the fosfomycin dosage. Besides, we found no differences between the in vitro-isolated mutant and its sensitive parental strain, which indicates the absence of fitness cost of fosfomycin resistance in S. aureus ATCC 29213. These findings demonstrate that agar plate determinations do not fit the MSW for fosfomycin treatment of rabbits infected with S. aureus ATCC 29213; therefore, the existence of the window must be demonstrated not only in vitro but also in vivo. Further research is needed on the exact mechanism of resistance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25424036     DOI: 10.1007/s10096-014-2285-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis        ISSN: 0934-9723            Impact factor:   3.267


  34 in total

Review 1.  Optimizing drug exposure to minimize selection of antibiotic resistance.

Authors:  Sara K Olofsson; Otto Cars
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2007-09-01       Impact factor: 9.079

2.  Testing the mutant selection window in rabbits infected with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus exposed to vancomycin.

Authors:  Yu-lin Zhu; Li-fen Hu; Qing Mei; Jun Cheng; Yan-yan Liu; Ying Ye; Jia-bin Li
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 5.790

Review 3.  Restricting the selection of antibiotic-resistant mutants: a general strategy derived from fluoroquinolone studies.

Authors:  X Zhao; K Drlica
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2001-09-15       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Daptomycin, fosfomycin, or both for treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus osteomyelitis in an experimental rat model.

Authors:  W Poeppl; S Tobudic; T Lingscheid; R Plasenzotti; N Kozakowski; H Lagler; A Georgopoulos; H Burgmann
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Dose dependence of emergence of resistance to linezolid in Enterococcus faecalis in vivo.

Authors:  Nadège Bourgeois-Nicolaos; Laurent Massias; Brigitte Couson; Marie-José Butel; Antoine Andremont; Florence Doucet-Populaire
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 5.226

6.  Restricting the selection of antibiotic-resistant mutant bacteria: measurement and potential use of the mutant selection window.

Authors:  Xilin Zhao; Karl Drlica
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2002-01-31       Impact factor: 5.226

7.  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.

Authors:  Kerry L LaPlante; Michael J Rybak
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Activities of mutant prevention concentration-targeted moxifloxacin and levofloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae in an in vitro pharmacodynamic model.

Authors:  George P Allen; Glenn W Kaatz; Michael J Rybak
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  In vitro activity of fosfomycin against 'problem' gram-positive cocci.

Authors:  J M Hamilton-Miller
Journal:  Microbios       Date:  1992

10.  Mutant selection window in levofloxacin and moxifloxacin treatments of experimental pneumococcal pneumonia in a rabbit model of human therapy.

Authors:  Delphine Croisier; Manuel Etienne; Emilie Bergoin; Pierre-Emmanuel Charles; Catherine Lequeu; Lionel Piroth; Henri Portier; Pascal Chavanet
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.191

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Revisiting the mutant prevention concentration to guide dosing in childhood tuberculosis.

Authors:  Devan Jaganath; H Simon Schaaf; Peter R Donald
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 5.790

2.  In Vitro Resistance Selection in Shigella flexneri by Azithromycin, Ceftriaxone, Ciprofloxacin, Levofloxacin, and Moxifloxacin.

Authors:  George P Allen; Kayla A Harris
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Determination of the Mutant Selection Window and Evaluation of the Killing of Mycoplasma gallisepticum by Danofloxacin, Doxycycline, Tilmicosin, Tylvalosin and Valnemulin.

Authors:  Nan Zhang; Xiaomei Ye; Yuzhi Wu; Zilong Huang; Xiaoyan Gu; Qinren Cai; Xiangguang Shen; Hongxia Jiang; Huanzhong Ding
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Synergistic Combination of Linezolid and Fosfomycin Closing Each Other's Mutant Selection Window to Prevent Enterococcal Resistance.

Authors:  Lifang Jiang; Na Xie; Mingtao Chen; Yanyan Liu; Shuaishuai Wang; Jun Mao; Jiabin Li; Xiaohui Huang
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 5.640

5.  Pharmacodynamics of Linezolid Plus Fosfomycin Against Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium in a Hollow Fiber Infection Model.

Authors:  Shuaishuai Wang; Huiping Liu; Jun Mao; Yu Peng; Yisong Yan; Yaowen Li; Na Zhang; Lifang Jiang; Yanyan Liu; Jiabin Li; Xiaohui Huang
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 5.640

6.  Relationship between Cefquinome PK/PD Parameters and Emergence of Resistance of Staphylococcus aureus in Rabbit Tissue-Cage Infection Model.

Authors:  Mingpeng Xiong; Xun Wu; Xiaomei Ye; Longfei Zhang; Shuyi Zeng; Zilong Huang; Yuzhi Wu; Jian Sun; Huanzhong Ding
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 5.640

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.