Defining daptomycin resistance prevention exposures in vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium and E. faecalis.

Daptomycin is used off-label for enterococcal infections; however, dosing targets for resistance prevention remain undefined. Doses of 4 to 6 mg/kg of body weight/day approved for staphylococci are likely inadequate against enterococci due to reduced susceptibility. We modeled daptomycin regimens in vitro to determine the minimum exposure to prevent daptomycin resistance (Dapr) in enterococci. Daptomycin simulations of 4 to 12 mg/kg/day (maximum concentration of drug in serum [Cmax] of 57.8, 93.9, 123.3, 141.1, and 183.7 mg/liter; half-life [t1/2] of 8 h) were tested against one Enterococcus faecium strain (S447) and one Enterococcus faecalis strain (S613) in a simulated endocardial vegetation pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model over 14 days. Samples were plated on media containing 3× the MIC of daptomycin to detect Dapr. Mutations in genes encoding proteins associated with cell envelope homeostasis (yycFG and liaFSR) and phospholipid metabolism (cardiolipin synthase [cls] and cyclopropane fatty acid synthetase [cfa]) were investigated in Dapr derivatives. Dapr derivatives were assessed for changes in susceptibility, surface charge, membrane depolarization, cell wall thickness (CWT), and growth rate. Strains S447 and S613 developed Dapr after simulations of 4 to 8 mg/kg/day but not 10 to 12 mg/kg/day. MICs for Dapr strains ranged from 8 to 256 mg/liter. Some S613 derivatives developed mutations in liaF or cls. S447 derivatives lacked mutations in these genes. Dapr derivatives from both strains exhibited lowered growth rates, up to a 72% reduction in daptomycin-induced depolarization and up to 6-nm increases in CWT (P<0.01). Peak/MIC and AUC0-24/MIC ratios (AUC0-24 is the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h) associated with Dapr prevention were 72.1 and 780 for S447 and 144 and 1561 for S613, respectively. Daptomycin doses of 10 mg/kg/day may be required to prevent Dapr in serious enterococcal infections.

Novel combinations of vancomycin plus ceftaroline or oxacillin against methicillin-resistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) and heterogeneous VISA.

We demonstrated a significant inverse correlation between vancomycin and beta-lactam susceptibilities in vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) and heterogeneous VISA (hVISA) isolates. Using time-kill assays, vancomycin plus oxacillin or ceftaroline was synergistic against 3 of 5 VISA and 1 of 5 hVISA isolates or 5 of 5 VISA and 4 of 5 hVISA isolates, respectively. Beta-lactam exposure reduced overall vancomycin-Bodipy (dipyrromethene boron difluoride [4,4-difluoro-4-bora-3a,4a-diaza-s-indacene] fluorescent dye) binding but may have improved vancomycin-cell wall interactions to improve vancomycin activity. Further research is warranted to elucidate the mechanism behind vancomycin and beta-lactam synergy.

Emergence of dalbavancin non-susceptible, vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA) after treatment of MRSA central line-associated bloodstream infection with a dalbavancin- and vancomycin-containing regimen.

OBJECTIVES: Dalbavancin is a long-acting lipoglycopeptide with activity against gram-positives, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The potential for lipoglycopeptides, with half-lives greater than 1 week, to select for resistance is unknown. Here we explore a case of MRSA central line-associated bloodstream infection in which dalbavancin and vancomycin non-susceptibility emerged in a urine isolate collected after the patient was treated with vancomycin and dalbavancin sequentially. METHODS: Isolates from blood and urine underwent susceptibility testing, and whole genome sequencing (WGS). The blood isolate was subjected to successive passage in vitro in the presence of escalating dalbavancin concentrations and the emergent isolate was subjected to repeat susceptibility testing and WGS. RESULTS: The blood isolate was fully susceptible to vancomycin; however, MICs of the urine isolate to dalbavancin, vancomycin, telavancin, and daptomycin were at least fourfold higher than the blood-derived strain. Both strains were indistinguishable by spa and variable number tandem repeat (VNTR) typing, and WGS revealed only seven variants, indicating clonality. Four variants affected genes, including a 3bp in-frame deletion in yvqF, a gene which has been implicated in glycopeptide resistance. Vancomycin and dalbavancin non-susceptibility emerged in the blood isolate after successive passage in vitro in the presence of dalbavancin, and WGS identified a single non-synonymous variant in yvqF. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first case in which VISA has emerged in the context of a dalbavancin-containing regimen. The selection for cross-resistance to vancomycin in vitro by dalbavancin exposure alone is troubling. Clinicians should be aware of the possibility for emergence of dalbavancin non-susceptibility and glycopeptide cross-resistance arising following therapy.