| Literature DB >> 33919397 |
Anna I Lauxen1, Piermichele Kobauri2, Michael Wegener2, Mickel J Hansen2, Nicole S Galenkamp3, Giovanni Maglia3, Wiktor Szymanski2,4, Ben L Feringa2, Oscar P Kuipers1.
Abstract
During the last decades, a continuous rise of multi-drug resistant pathogens has threatened antibiotic efficacy. To tackle this key challenge, novel antimicrobial therapies are needed with increased specificity for the site of infection. Photopharmacology could enable such specificity by allowing for the control of antibiotic activity with light, as exemplified by trans/cis-tetra-ortho-chloroazobenzene-trimethoprim (TCAT) conjugates. Resistance development against the on (irradiated, TCATa) and off (thermally adapted, TCATd) states of TCAT were compared to that of trimethoprim (TMP) in Escherichia coli mutant strain CS1562. Genomics and transcriptomics were used to explore the acquired resistance. Although TCAT shows TMP-like dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) inhibition in vitro, transcriptome analyses show different responses in acquired resistance. Resistance against TCATa (on) relies on the production of exopolysaccharides and overexpression of TolC. While resistance against TCATd (off) follows a slightly different gene expression profile, both indicate hampering the entrance of the molecule into the cell. Conversely, resistance against TMP is based on alterations in cell metabolism towards a more persister-like phenotype, as well as alteration of expression levels of enzymes involved in the folate biosynthesis. This study provides a deeper understanding of the development of new therapeutic strategies and the consequences on resistance development against photopharmacological drugs.Entities:
Keywords: E. coli; TCAT; TolC; exopolysaccharides; photoswitchable antibiotic; resistance mechanism; trimethoprim
Year: 2021 PMID: 33919397 PMCID: PMC8143356 DOI: 10.3390/ph14050392
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8247
Figure 1Structural formulas for TMP, TCATd and TCATa. The design of TCATa and TCATd is based on TMP; the difference in rest group (R) for each compound is shown in detail.
Figure 2Dose–response curves for TCATd (blue, >99% trans-TCAT), TCATa (red, 87:13 cis:trans distribution) and TMP (green) against E. coli DHFR.
Minimal inhibitory concentration for TMP, TCATa and TCATd of the E. coli parent strain and resistant isolates. As well as the number of generations grown during the experiment. Resistant isolates from each condition are characterized by a superscript R (R).
| Strain | MIC TMP (µM) | MIC TCATa (µM) | MIC TCATd (µM) | Number of Generations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.05 | 4.9 | 80.1 | 32 | |
| TMPR | 1.4 | 21 | ||
| TCATaR | 49.3 | 23 | ||
| TCATdR | 98.5 | 12 |
Mutations shared between all resistant isolates. Arrows (→) in the first column (Mutation) indicate the nature of the mutation, for example, G→A indicates guanine is replaced by adenine. Deletions are denoted by the delta sign (Δ). Addition of an amino acid is indicated by a plus sign (+). The arrows in the column Gene indicate the direction of transcription of the genes on the genome and intergenic regions are denoted by a forward slash (→/←). In other words, the mutation G→A occurs in the intergenic region (/) between the genes aqpZ and lysO which are both forwardly transcribed (→) on the genome. Evidence from mapped reads is categorized in read alignment (RA), missing coverage (MC) and/or new junction (JC).
| Predicted Mutations | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mutation | Annotation | Gene | Description | Evidence | Seq Id | Position |
|
| Intergenic (+202/−293) | aquaporin Z/L lysine exporter LysO | RA | NODE_2 | 134,755 | |
|
| Intergenic (+2/−2) | tRNA Val/tRNA Lys | RA | NODE_20 | 45,821 | |
|
| Intergenic (+3/−2) | tRNA Val/tRNA Lys | RA | NODE_20 | 46,127 | |
|
| Intergenic (+1023/+707) | sodium potassium/proton antiporter ChaA/3 deoxy 8 phosphooctulonate synthase | RA | NODE_4 | 17,237 | |
|
| Intergenic (+1387/+343) | sodium potassium/proton antiporter ChaA/3 deoxy 8 phosphooctulonate synthase | RA | NODE_4 | 17,601 | |
|
| Intergenic (+1420/+310) | sodium potassium/proton antiporter ChaA/3 deoxy 8 phosphooctulonate synthase | RA | NODE_4 | 17,634 | |
|
| Intergenic (+1425/+305) | sodium potassium/proton antiporter ChaA/3 deoxy 8 phosphooctulonate synthase | RA | NODE_4 | 17,639 | |
|
| Intergenic (+1428/+302) | sodium potassium/proton antiporter ChaA/3 deoxy 8 phosphooctulonate synthase | RA | NODE_4 | 17,642 | |
|
| Intergenic (−/−) | −/− | −/− | RA | NODE_97 | 18 |
|
| Intergenic (−/−) | −/− | −/− | RA | NODE_97 | 65 |
|
| Intergenic (−/−) | −/− | −/− | RA | NODE_97 | 98 |
|
| Intergenic (−/−) | −/− | −/− | RA | NODE_97 | 104 |
|
|
| Ecoli_03722 → | IS5 like element ISKpn26 family transposase | RA | NODE_39 | 4254 |
Genomic mutations specific for the TCATaR isolate. Deletions are denoted by the delta sign (Δ). Evidence from mapped reads is categorized in read alignment (RA), missing coverage (MC) and/or new junction (JC).
| Predicted Mutations | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Annotation | Gene | Description | Evidence | Seq Id | Position |
|
| coding (87/1257 nt) |
| MFS transporter | RA | NODE_10 | 108,811 |
|
|
|
| MC, JC | NODE_26 | 7555 | |
(A) File describing the experiment factors. (B) File describing the comparisons made during the analysis of differential gene expression. Resistant isolates from each condition are characterized by a superscript R (R).
| (A) Factors | (B) Contrasts | |
|---|---|---|
| Experiment | Strain | |
| C | ||
| TCATaR | TCATa resistant isolate | TCATaR-C |
| TCATdR | TCATd resistant isolate | TCATdR-C |
| TMPR | TMP- resistant isolate | TMPR-C |
Figure 3Results of global analysis of the dataset with T-REx: (a) library sizes; (b) box plot of normalized signals for each sample; (c) correlation matrix of the experiments; and (d) Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of the experiments. Experiment names are plotted as vectors (points).
Figure 4Euler diagrams of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) for each contrast, created with RStudio. Diagrams show how many genes were significantly up- or downregulated (red and blue respectively) and the total number of DEGs using a cutoff fold change of ≥2 and a p-value of ≤0.05, respectively: (a) upregulated genes; (b) downregulated genes; and (c) up- and downregulated genes for all contrasts.
Figure 5Simplification of the folate biosynthesis pathway. Adapted from Schober et al., Cell Reports (2019). Both enzymes and metabolites are abbreviated: dihydrofolate (DHF), tetrahydrofolate (THF), dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR), thymidylate synthase (TYMS), serine hydroxymethyltransferase (SHMT), glycine cleavage system (GDC). Black text and arrows indicate the steps most important in this genetic context. Genes glyA and gcvH/P/T are significantly downregulated, while ygfA is significantly upregulated.