| Literature DB >> 28326075 |
Suresh Panthee1, Atmika Paudel1, Hiroshi Hamamoto1, Kazuhisa Sekimizu1.
Abstract
The demand for novel antibiotics to combat the global spread of multi drug-resistant pathogens continues to grow. Pathogenic bacteria and fungi that cause fatal human infections can also kill silkworms and the infected silkworms can be cured by the same antibiotics used to treat infections in the clinic. As an invertebrate model, silkworm model is characterized by its convenience, low cost, no ethical issues. The presence of conserved immune response and similar pharmacokinetics compared to mammals make silkworm infection model suitable to examine the therapeutic effectiveness of antimicrobial agents. Based on this, we utilized silkworm bacterial infection model to screen the therapeutic effectiveness of various microbial culture broths and successfully identified a therapeutically effective novel antibiotic, lysocin E, which has a novel mode of action of binding to menaquinone, thus leading to membrane damage and bactericidal activity. The similar approach to screen potential antibiotics resulted in the identification of other therapeutically effective novel antibiotics, such as nosokomycin and ASP2397 (VL-2397). In this regard, we propose that the silkworm antibiotic screening model is very effective for identifying novel antibiotics. In this review, we summarize the advantages of the silkworm model and propose that the utilization of silkworm infection model will facilitate the discovery of novel therapeutically effective antimicrobial agents.Entities:
Keywords: lysocin E; novel antibiotics; pharmacokinetics; silkworm model; therapeutic activity
Year: 2017 PMID: 28326075 PMCID: PMC5339274 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.00373
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Invertebrate animal models.
| Fruitfly ( | 1–3 | Adult: fly | Required | High | Required | Oral, injection to dorsal surface, not accurate | Extensive |
| Grasshopper ( | 60–80 | Jump | Not required | High | Required | – | Little |
| Honey bee ( | 15–17 | Adult: fly | Not required | High | Required | – | Extensive |
| Waxmoth ( | 30–40 | Larvae: faster than silkworm | Not required | Higher than silkworm, less than others | Not required | Oral, topical, injection to ventral surface/accurate in case of injection | Extensive |
| Adult: fly | |||||||
| Silkworm ( | 50–60 | Larvae: slow | Not required | Low | Not required | Oral, injection to dorsal surface: intra hemolymph, intra midgut/accurate in the case of injection | Extensive |
| Adult: don't fly |
Figure 1Silkworm and its organs. (A) Manual injection of a sample into the silkworm hemolymph using a 1-ml disposable syringe, and (B) comparison of silkworm organs involved in drug absorption, metabolism, and elimination between silkworms and mammals.
Silkworm infection model and therapeutic effect of antimicrobial agents.
| Methicillin-susceptible | Kanamycin | 3 | Hamamoto et al., |
| Arbekacin | 4 | ||
| Teicoplanin | 0.3 | ||
| Vancomycin | 0.3 | ||
| Tetracycline | 0.4 | ||
| Minocycline | 3.9 | ||
| Chloramphenicol | 7 | ||
| Flomoxef | 0.2 | ||
| Linezolid | 9 | ||
| Methicillin-resistant | Vancomycin | <6.5 | Kaito et al., |
| Vancomycin-resistant | Vancomycin-ceftriaxone | ND | Tabuchi et al., |
| Minocycline | 7.8 | Hamamoto et al., | |
| Sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim | 57 | ||
| Imipenem-cilastatin | 50 | ||
| Amphotericin B | 1.8 | Hamamoto et al., | |
| Fluconazole | 1.8 | ||
| Amphotericin B | 4.1 | Hamamoto et al., | |
| Fluconazole | 1.8 | ||
| Amphotericin B | 14 | Matsumoto et al., | |
| Flucytosine | 6 | ||
| Fluconazole | 2 | ||
| Ketokonazole | 19 |
Figure 2Utilization of silkworms to screen therapeutically active antimicrobial agents.
Purification of lysocin E from the culture supernatant of .
| Acetone extract | 25 | 90 |
| Butanol extract | 0.6 | 4 |
| Water precipitation | N.D. | 1.8 |
| ODS column chromatography | N.D. | 0.5 |
| Lysocin E | 5 | 0.3 |
ND, not determined.
Figure 3Lysocins, mode of action, and biosynthesis. (A) Chemical structure of lysocins A–I and (B) schematic representation of membrane damage by lysocin E (C) non-ribosomal peptide synthetases involved in lysocin biosynthesis and amino acids activated by the 12 modules in LesA and LesB.
MIC of lysocin E against various microorganisms (Hamamoto et al., .
| Methicillin-susceptible | 1–4 |
| Methicillin-resistant | 4 |
| Vancomycin-resistant | 8 |
| 2 | |
| 1 | |
| 8 | |
| >100 | |
| >100 | |
| >100 | |
| >100 | |
| >100 | |
| >128 |
Laboratory generated vancomycin-resistant strain (Ishii et al., .
Figure 4Chemical structure of the novel antifungal compound ASP2397 (VL-2397). ASP2397, purified based on in-vivo therapeutic effect in silkworm infection model.