Inoculum effects of cefepime/zidebactam (WCK 5222) and ertapenem/zidebactam (WCK 6777) for Enterobacterales in relation to ß-lactamase type and enhancer effect, as tested by BSAC agar dilution.

OBJECTIVES: Combinations of PBP3-active ß-lactams with developmental diazabicyclooctanes (DBOs), e.g. zidebactam, remain active against many MBL producers via an enhancer effect. We explored how this activity is affected by inoculum. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MICs of zidebactam and its cefepime and ertapenem combinations (WCK 5222 and WCK 6777, respectively) were determined by BSAC agar dilution at inocula from 3-6 × 103 to 3-6 × 105 cfu/spot. Isolates, principally Klebsiella spp., were chosen as having previously tested resistant to zidebactam or its cefepime combination, and by ß-lactamase type. RESULTS: MICs of zidebactam, tested alone, were strongly inoculum dependent regardless of ß-lactamase type; MICs of its cefepime and ertapenem combinations likewise were strongly inoculum dependent-rising ≥32-fold across the inoculum range tested-but only for MBL producers. Combination MICs for isolates with non-MBLs, including those with OXA-48 (where the enhancer effect remains critical for ertapenem/zidebactam) were much less inoculum dependent, particularly for cefepime/zidebactam. MBL producers frequently moved between putative 'susceptible' (MIC ≤ 8 + 8 mg/L) and 'resistant' (MIC > 8 + 8 mg/L) categories according to whether the inoculum was at the high or low end of BSAC's acceptable (1-4 × 104 cfu/spot) range. CONCLUSIONS: The activity of zidebactam combinations against MBL producers, which strongly depends on the enhancer effect, is inoculum dependent. Animal data suggest consistent in vivo activity even in high-inoculum pneumonia models. Contingent on this being supported by clinical experience, the combination behaviour may be best represented by the MICs obtained at the lower end of BSAC's inoculum range.

Activity of ertapenem/zidebactam (WCK 6777) against problem Enterobacterales.

BACKGROUND: Secondary healthcare will remain pressured for some years, both because SARS-CoV-2 will circulate as a nosocomial pathogen, and owing to backlogs of patients awaiting delayed elective procedures. These stresses will drive the use of Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Therapy (OPAT), which will need to cover increasingly resistant Gram-negative opportunists. We evaluated the activity of ertapenem/zidebactam, proposed for 2 + 2 g q24h administration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MICs were determined, by BSAC agar dilution, for 1632 Enterobacterales submitted to the UK national reference laboratory for investigation of antimicrobial resistance. RESULTS: Over 90% of Escherichia coli with AmpC, ESBLs, KPC, metallo- or OXA-48 carbapenemases were inhibited by ertapenem/zidebactam 1:1 at ertapenem's current 0.5 mg/L breakpoint. For other major Enterobacterales, the proportions inhibited by ertapenem/zidebactam 1:1 at 0.5 mg/L were mostly 65% to 90% but were lower for Klebsiella pneumoniae/oxytoca with metallo- or OXA-48 ß-lactamases. However, animal studies support an 8 mg/L breakpoint for ertapenem/zidebactam, based on a shortened T>MIC being needed compared with ertapenem alone. On this basis ertapenem/zidebactam would count as active against 90%-100% of isolates in all groups except K. pneumoniae/oxytoca with MBLs (±OXA-48), where MICs and percent susceptibility vary substantially even with inocula within the BSAC acceptable range. CONCLUSIONS: Ertapenem/zidebactam has a proposed once-daily regimen well suited to OPAT. Even on highly conservative breakpoint projections, it has potential against MDR E. coli, including metallo-carbapenemase producers. If trial data sustain the 8 mg/L breakpoint indicated by animal experiments, its potential will extend widely across infections due to ESBL-, AmpC- and carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales.

Selection and characterization of mutational resistance to aztreonam/avibactam in ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales.

BACKGROUND: Aztreonam/avibactam is being developed for its broad activity against carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales, including those with metallo-ß-lactamases (MBLs). Its potential to select resistance in target pathogens was explored. Findings are compared with previous data for ceftazidime/avibactam and ceftaroline/avibactam. METHODS: Single-step mutants were sought from 52 Enterobacterales with AmpC, ESBL, KPC, MBL and OXA-48-like enzymes. Mutation frequencies were calculated. MICs were determined by CLSI agar dilution. Genomes were sequenced using Illumina methodology. RESULTS: Irrespective of ß-lactamase type and of whether avibactam was used at 1 or 4 mg/L, mutants could rarely be obtained at >4× the starting MIC, and most MIC rises were correspondingly small. Putative resistance (MIC >8 + 4 mg/L) associated with changes to ß-lactamases was seen only for mutants of AmpC, where it was associated with Asn346Tyr and Tyr150Cys substitutions. Asn346Tyr led to broad resistance to avibactam combinations; Tyr150Cys significantly affected only aztreonam/avibactam. MIC rises up to 4 + 4 mg/L were seen for producers of mutant KPC-2 or -3 enzymes, and were associated with Trp105Arg, Ser106Pro and Ser109Pro substitutions, which all reduced the MICs of other ß-lactams. For producers of other ß-lactamase types, we largely found mutants with lesions in baeRS or envZ, putatively affecting drug accumulation. Single mutants had lesions in ampD, affecting AmpC expression or ftsI, encoding PBP3. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of mutational resistance to aztreonam/avibactam appears smaller than for ceftazidime/avibactam, where Asp179Tyr arises readily in KPC enzymes, conferring frank resistance. Asn346 substitutions in AmpC enzymes may remain a risk, having been repeatedly selected with multiple avibactam combinations in vitro.

Activity of cefepime/zidebactam (WCK 5222) against 'problem' antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria sent to a national reference laboratory.

BACKGROUND: Triple-action diazabicyclooctanes, e.g. zidebactam, combine ß-lactamase inhibition, antibacterial activity, and 'enhancement' of PBP3-targeted ß-lactams. OBJECTIVES: To examine the activity of cefepime/zidebactam against consecutive 'problem' Gram-negative bacteria referred to the UK national reference laboratory. METHODS: MICs were determined by BSAC agar dilution for 1632 Enterobacterales, 745 Pseudomonas aeruginosa and 450 other non-fermenters, categorized by carbapenemase detection and interpretive reading. RESULTS: Universal susceptibility to cefepime/zidebactam 8 + 8 mg/L was seen for otherwise multidrug-resistant Enterobacterales with AmpC, extended-spectrum, K1, KPC and OXA-48-like ß-lactamases, or with impermeability and 'unassigned' mechanisms. Unlike ceftazidime/avibactam and all other comparators, cefepime/zidebactam 8 + 8 mg/L also inhibited most (190/210, 90.5%) Enterobacterales with MBLs. Resistance in the remaining minority of MBL producers, and in 13/24 with both NDM MBLs and OXA-48-like enzymes, was associated with Klebsiella pneumoniae ST14. For Pseudomonas aeruginosa, MICs of cefepime/zidebactam rose with efflux grade, but exceeded 8 + 8 mg/L for only 11/85 isolates even in the highly-raised efflux group. Among 103 P. aeruginosa with ESBLs or MBLs, 97 (94.5%) were inhibited by cefepime/zidebactam 8 + 8 mg/L whereas fewer than 15% were susceptible to any comparator. MICs for Acinetobacter baumannii with acquired OXA carbapenemases clustered around 8 + 8 to 32 + 32 mg/L, with higher values for MBL producers. A strong enhancer effect augmented activity against many isolates that were highly resistant to cefepime and zidebactam alone and which had mechanisms not inhibited by zidebactam. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming successful clinical trials, cefepime/zidebactam has scope to widely overcome critical resistances in both Enterobacterales and non-fermenters.

Activity of imipenem/relebactam against Pseudomonas aeruginosa producing ESBLs and carbapenemases.

BACKGROUND: ESBL- and carbapenemase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa are prevalent in, for example, the Middle East, Eastern Europe and Latin America, though rarer elsewhere. Because P. aeruginosa readily mutate to become carbapenem resistant via loss of OprD, isolates producing ESBLs are often as broadly resistant as those producing carbapenemases. We hypothesized that: (i) relebactam might overcome class A carbapenemases directly in P. aeruginosa; and (ii) relebactam's inhibition of AmpC, which gives a generalized potentiation of imipenem against the species, might restore imipenem susceptibility in OprD-deficient ESBL producers. METHODS: MICs were determined using CLSI agar dilution for P. aeruginosa isolates producing ESBLs, principally VEB types, and for those producing GES-5, KPC and other carbapenemases. RESULTS: Relebactam potentiated imipenem by around 4-8-fold for most P. aeruginosa isolates producing VEB and other ESBLs; however, MICs were typically only reduced to 4-16 mg/L, thus mostly remaining above EUCAST's susceptible range and only partly overlapping CLSI's intermediate range. Strong (approx. 64-fold) potentiation was seen for isolates producing KPC carbapenemases, but only 2-fold synergy for those with GES-5. Predictably, potentiation was not seen for isolates with class B or D carbapenemase activity. CONCLUSIONS: Relebactam did potentiate imipenem against ESBL-producing P. aeruginosa, which are mostly imipenem resistant via OprD loss, but this potentiation was generally insufficient to reduce imipenem MICs to the clinical range. Imipenem resistance owing to KPC carbapenemases was reversed by relebactam in P. aeruginosa, just as for Enterobacterales.

Are resistance rates among bloodstream isolates a good proxy for other infections? Analysis from the BSAC Resistance Surveillance Programme.

BACKGROUND: Bacteraemia data are often used as a general measure of resistance prevalence but may poorly represent other infection types. We compared resistance prevalence between bloodstream infection (BSI) and lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) isolates collected by the BSAC Resistance Surveillance Programme. METHODS: BSI isolates (n = 8912) were collected during 2014-18 inclusive and LRTI isolates (n = 6280) between October 2013 to September 2018 from participating laboratories in the UK and Ireland, to a fixed annual quota per species group. LRTI isolates, but not BSI, were selected by onset: community for Streptococcus pneumoniae; hospital for Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacterales. MICs were determined centrally by agar dilution; statistical modelling adjusted for ICU location and possible clustering by collection centre. RESULTS: Resistance was more prevalent among the LRTI isolates, even after adjusting for a larger proportion of ICU patients. LRTI P. aeruginosa and S. pneumoniae were more often resistant than BSI isolates for most antibiotics, and the proportion of MRSA was higher in LRTI. For S. pneumoniae, the observation reflected different serotype distributions in LRTI and BSI. Relationships between LRTI and resistance were less marked for Enterobacterales, but LRTI E. coli were more often resistant to ß-lactams, particularly penicillin/ß-lactamase inhibitor combinations, and LRTI K. pneumoniae to piperacillin/tazobactam. For E. cloacae there was a weak association between LRTI, production of AmpC enzymes and cephalosporin resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of resistance prevalence based upon bloodstream isolates underestimate the extent of the problem in respiratory isolates, particularly for P. aeruginosa, S. pneumoniae, S. aureus and, less so, for Enterobacterales.

Activity of ß-lactam/taniborbactam (VNRX-5133) combinations against carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria.

BACKGROUND: Boronates are of growing interest as ß-lactamase inhibitors. The only marketed analogue, vaborbactam, principally targets KPC carbapenemases, but taniborbactam (VNRX-5133, Venatorx) has a broader spectrum. METHODS: MICs of cefepime and meropenem were determined combined with taniborbactam or avibactam for carbapenem-resistant UK isolates. ß-Lactamase genes and porin alterations were sought by PCR or sequencing. RESULTS: Taniborbactam potentiated partner ß-lactams against: (i) Enterobacterales with KPC, other class A, OXA-48-like, VIM and NDM (not IMP) carbapenemases; and (ii) Enterobacterales inferred to have combinations of ESBL or AmpC activity and impermeability. Potentiation of cefepime (the partner for clinical development) by taniborbactam was slightly weaker than by avibactam for Enterobacterales with KPC or OXA-48-like carbapenemases, but MICs of cefepime/taniborbactam were similar to those of ceftazidime/avibactam, and the spectrum was wider. MICs of cefepime/taniborbactam nonetheless remained >8 + 4 mg/L for 22%-32% of NDM-producing Enterobacterales. Correlates of raised cefepime/taniborbactam MICs among these NDM Enterobacterales were a cefepime MIC >128 mg/L, particular STs and, for Escherichia coli only: (i) the particular blaNDM variant (even though published data suggest all variants are inhibited similarly); (ii) inserts in PBP3; and (iii) raised aztreonam/avibactam MICs. Little or no potentiation of cefepime or meropenem was seen for Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii with MBLs, probably reflecting slower uptake or stronger efflux. Potentiation of cefepime was seen for Stenotrophomonas maltophilia and Elizabethkingia meningoseptica, which have both chromosomal ESBLs and MBLs. CONCLUSIONS: Taniborbactam broadly reversed cefepime or meropenem non-susceptibility in Enterobacterales and, less reliably, in non-fermenters.

In Vitro Activity of Cefiderocol, a Siderophore Cephalosporin, against Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria.

Cefiderocol is a parenteral siderophore cephalosporin with a catechol-containing 3' substituent. We evaluated its MICs against Gram-negative bacteria, using iron-depleted Mueller-Hinton broth. The panel comprised 305 isolates of Enterobacterales, 111 of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and 99 of Acinetobacter baumannii, all selected for carbapenem resistance and multidrug resistance to other agents. At 2 and 4 µg/ml, cefiderocol inhibited 78.7 and 92.1%, respectively, of all Enterobacterales isolates tested, with rates of 80 to 100% for isolates with all modes of carbapenem resistance except NDM enzymes (41.0% inhibited at 2 µg/ml and 72.1% at 4 µg/ml) or combinations of extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL) and porin loss (61.5% inhibited at 2 µg/ml and 88.5% at 4 µg/ml). Cefiderocol also inhibited 81.1 and 86.5% of all P. aeruginosa isolates at 2 and 4 µg/ml, respectively, with rates of 80 to 100% for isolates with VIM, IMP, GES, or VEB ß-lactamases and slightly lower rates for those with NDM (45.5% at 2 µg/ml and 72.7% at 4 µg/ml) and PER (66.7% at 2 µg/ml and 73.3% at 4 µg/ml) enzymes; 63.3% of P. aeruginosa isolates were inhibited at the FDA's 1-µg/ml breakpoint. Lastly, cefiderocol at 2 and 4 µg/ml inhibited 80.8 and 88.9% of the A. baumannii isolates, respectively, with rates of >85% for isolates with OXA-51-like, -23, -24, or -58 enzymes and 50% at 2 µg/ml and 80% at 4 µg/ml for those with NDM carbapenemases. Dipicolinic acid and avibactam weakly potentiated cefiderocol against Enterobacterales isolates with metallo-ß-lactamases (MBLs) and serine carbapenemase, respectively, indicating incomplete ß-lactamase stability.

Activity of ceftaroline versus ceftobiprole against staphylococci and pneumococci in the UK and Ireland: analysis of BSAC surveillance data.

BACKGROUND: Ceftaroline and ceftobiprole inhibit most MRSA and MDR pneumococci. Few direct comparisons of their activity have been published, but in several years (2008, 2013, 2017 and 2018) both were tested in parallel in the BSAC Resistance Surveillance Programme, giving paired results. These are reviewed. METHODS: Isolates included were bloodstream Staphylococcus aureus [n = 1884 (MRSA, n = 234)], bloodstream CoNS (n = 813; 574 methicillin resistant), and bloodstream (n = 852) and respiratory (n = 670) Streptococcus pneumoniae. MICs were determined by BSAC agar dilution and reviewed against EUCAST breakpoints; S. aureus breakpoints were assumed for CoNS. RESULTS: Ceftaroline MICs were mostly 2-fold lower than those of ceftobiprole, but, for all groups, MICs of both agents were strongly inter-related. Methicillin-susceptible staphylococci were universally susceptible to both agents; all MRSA were susceptible to ceftobiprole, whereas 10/234 had intermediate/high-dose susceptibility to ceftaroline. Among methicillin-resistant CoNS, 88% were susceptible to both agents, but reduced ceftaroline susceptibility and ceftobiprole resistance were frequent (65%) among methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus haemolyticus. One S. pneumoniae was resistant to both ceftaroline (MIC 0.5 mg/L) and ceftobiprole (MIC 1 mg/L) and seven others were only resistant to ceftobiprole (MIC 1 mg/L); seven of these eight pneumococci belonged to serotype 19A or 19F. No time trend in susceptibility was seen for either cephalosporin. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline and ceftobiprole have similarly good activity against staphylococci and pneumococci. Therapeutic choices between these agents should be predicated on other differentiating factors, including licensed indications, clinical experience and need for Gram-negative coverage.

Inherent colistin resistance in genogroups of the Enterobacter cloacae complex: epidemiological, genetic and biochemical analysis from the BSAC Resistance Surveillance Programme.

BACKGROUND: Polymyxins have re-entered use against problem Gram-negative bacteria. Resistance rates are uncertain, with estimates confounded by selective testing. METHODS: The BSAC Resistance Surveillance Programme has routinely tested colistin since 2010; we reviewed data up to 2017 for relevant Enterobacterales (n = 10 914). Unexpectedly frequent resistance was seen among the Enterobacter cloacae complex isolates (n = 1749); for these, we investigated relationships to species, genome, carbon source utilization and LPS structure. RESULTS: Annual colistin resistance rates among E. cloacae complex isolates were 4.4%-20%, with a rising trend among bloodstream organisms; in contrast, annual rates for Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. (including K. aerogenes) generally remained <2%. WGS split the E. cloacae complex isolates into seven genogroup clusters, designated A-G. Among isolates assigned to genogroups A-D, 47/50 sequenced were colistin resistant, and many of those belonging to genogroups A-C identified as E. asburiae. Isolates belonging to genogroups E-G consistently identified as E. cloacae and were rarely (only 3/45 representatives sequenced) colistin resistant. Genogroups F and G, the predominant colistin-susceptible clusters, were metabolically distinct from other clusters, notably regarding utilization or not of l-fucose, formic acid, d-serine, adonitol, myo-inositol, l-lyxose and polysorbates. LPS from resistant organisms grown without colistin pressure lacked substitutions with 4-amino-arabinose or ethanolamine but was more structurally complex, with more molecular species present. CONCLUSIONS: Colistin resistance is frequent in the E. cloacae complex and increasing among bloodstream isolates. It is associated with: (i) particular genomic and metabolic clusters; (ii) identification as E. asburiae; and (iii) with more complex LPS architectures.

Potentiation of imipenem by relebactam for Pseudomonas aeruginosa from bacteraemia and respiratory infections.

BACKGROUND: Imipenem resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa most often entails loss of the 'carbapenem-specific' porin OprD; more rarely it reflects acquired carbapenemases. Loss of OprD only confers resistance to imipenem if AmpC ß-lactamase is expressed, and we investigated whether this mechanism was overcome by relebactam, a developmental diazabicyclooctane ß-lactamase inhibitor. METHODS: Consecutive P. aeruginosa isolates causing bacteraemia or hospital-onset lower respiratory tract infections were collected between 2014 and 2016 under the aegis of the BSAC Resistance Surveillance Programme. Imipenem MICs were determined centrally by BSAC agar dilution, with relebactam at a fixed concentration (4 mg/L). RESULTS: For most imipenem-susceptible P. aeruginosa (726/759, 95.7%), the MICs of imipenem alone were 0.5-2 mg/L and were decreased 3- to 4-fold by addition of relebactam, as based on geometric means or modes. For most imipenem-resistant P. aeruginosa (82/92, 89%), imipenem MICs were 8-16 mg/L, and were reduced to 1-2 mg/L by relebactam. These patterns applied regardless of whether the isolates were susceptible to penicillins and cephalosporins or had phenotypes suggesting derepressed AmpC or up-regulated efflux. Imipenem MICs for five P. aeruginosa with MBLs remained high (≥16 mg/L) regardless of relebactam. CONCLUSIONS: Potentiation of imipenem by relebactam was almost universal, in accordance with the view that endogenous pseudomonal AmpC ordinarily protects against this carbapenem to a small degree. Imipenem MICs were reduced to the current breakpoint, or lower, except for MBL producers. Potentiation was not compromised by derepression of AmpC or up-regulation of efflux.

Activity of nacubactam (RG6080/OP0595) combinations against MBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae.

BACKGROUND: Diazabicyclooctanes (DBOs) are promising ß-lactamase inhibitors. Some, including nacubactam (OP0595/RG6080), also bind PBP2 and have an enhancer effect, allowing activity against Enterobacteriaceae with MBLs, which DBOs do not inhibit. We tested the activity of nacubactam/ß-lactam combinations against MBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae. METHODS: Test panels comprised (i) 210 consecutive Enterobacteriaceae with NDM or VIM MBLs, as referred by UK diagnostic laboratories, and (ii) 99 supplementary MBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, representing less prevalent phenotypes, species and enzymes. MICs were determined by CLSI agar dilution. RESULTS: MICs of nacubactam alone were bimodal, clustering at 1-8 mg/L or >32 mg/L; >85% of values for Escherichia coli and Enterobacter spp. fell into the low MIC cluster, whereas Proteeae were universally resistant and the Klebsiella spp. were divided between the two groups. Depending on the prospective breakpoint (4 + 4 or 8 + 4 mg/L), and on whether all isolates were considered or solely the Consecutive Collection, meropenem/nacubactam and cefepime/nacubactam inhibited 80.3%-93.3% of MBL producers, with substantial gains over nacubactam alone. Against the most resistant isolates (comprising 57 organisms with MICs of nacubactam >32 mg/L, cefepime ≥128 mg/L and meropenem ≥128 mg/L), cefepime/nacubactam at 8 + 4 mg/L inhibited 63.2% and meropenem/nacubactam at 8 + 4 mg/L inhibited 43.9%. Aztreonam/nacubactam, incorporating an MBL-stable ß-lactam partner, was almost universally active against the MBL producers and, unlike aztreonam/avibactam, had an enhancer effect. CONCLUSIONS: Nacubactam combinations, including those using MBL-labile ß-lactams, e.g. meropenem and cefepime, can overcome most MBL-mediated resistance. This behaviour reflects nacubactam's direct antibacterial and enhancer activity.

Evaluation of temocillin for phenotypic carbapenemase screening of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica isolates in relation to the presence of genes encoding ESBLs and carbapenemase production.

BACKGROUND: The expression of enzymes of the OXA-48 carbapenemase group is difficult to detect by phenotypic methods owing to frequent low levels of carbapenem resistance and negative results with some screening methods. Temocillin has been shown to be a good option for phenotypic screening as it is hydrolysed by the OXA-48-group enzymes, whereas ESBLs, AmpC and some other carbapenemases have a lower hydrolytic effect on this antimicrobial. However, no epidemiological cut-off for temocillin is available. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate temocillin MICs in relation to the presence or absence of genes encoding ESBLs and carbapenemases in Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica. METHODS: In this study, 111 E. coli and 102 S. enterica isolates, including WT and well-characterized ESBL-, AmpC- or carbapenemase-producing isolates, were tested by three independent laboratories. MICs were determined according to the CLSI guidelines by agar dilution with the test range from 0.5 to 512 mg/L temocillin and WGS was performed and analysed with ResFinder. RESULTS: Some overlap was detected between temocillin MICs for WT and ESBL- or AmpC-producing isolates. However, isolates carrying genes encoding carbapenemases showed a broader range of MICs for both E. coli and S. enterica. Higher MICs were observed for the OXA-48 group, VIM and some NDM-producing isolates, whereas isolates harbouring KPC enzymes showed low MICs. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that temocillin MICs enable phenotypic distinction between strains producing OXA-48-group enzymes and both WT susceptible and ESBL/AmpC-carrying isolates, whereas the distinction from other carbapenemases likely requires genotypic testing.

Activity of RX-04 Pyrrolocytosine Protein Synthesis Inhibitors against Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria.

Pyrrolocytosines RX-04A to -D are designed to bind to the bacterial 50S ribosomal subunit differently from currently used antibiotics. The four analogs had broad anti-Gram-negative activity: RX-04A-the most active analog-inhibited 94.7% of clinical Enterobacteriaceae, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa at 0.5 to 4 µg/ml, with no MICs of >8 µg/ml. MICs for multidrug-resistant (MDR) carbapenemase producers were up to 2-fold higher than those for control strains; values were highest for one Serratia isolate with porin and efflux lesions. mcr-1 did not affect MICs.

Selection of mutants with resistance or diminished susceptibility to ceftazidime/avibactam from ESBL- and AmpC-producing Enterobacteriaceae.

Introduction: Difficult Gram-negative infections are increasingly treated with new ß-lactamase inhibitor combinations, e.g. ceftazidime/avibactam. Disturbingly, mutations in KPC carbapenemases can confer ceftazidime/avibactam resistance, which is sometimes selected during therapy. We explored whether this risk extended to AmpC and ESBL enzymes. Methods: Mutants were selected by plating AmpC-derepressed strains, ESBL producers and ceftazidime-susceptible controls on agar containing ceftazidime + avibactam (1 or 4 mg/L). MICs were determined by CLSI agar dilution; WGS was by Illumina methodology. Results: Using 2× MIC of ceftazidime + 1 mg/L avibactam, mutants were selected from all strain types at frequencies of 10-7-10-9. Rates diminished to <10-9 with 4 mg/L avibactam or higher MIC multiples, except with AmpC-derepressed Enterobacteriaceae. Characterized mutants (n = 10; MICs 4-64 mg/L) of AmpC-derepressed strains had modifications in ampC, variously giving Arg168Pro/His, Gly176Arg/Asp, Asn366Tyr or small deletions around positions 309-314. Mutants of ESBL producers (n = 19; MICs 0.5-16 mg/L) mostly had changes affecting permeability, efflux or ß-lactamase quantity; only one had an altered ß-lactamase, with an Asp182Tyr substitution in CTX-M-15, raising the ceftazidime/avibactam MIC, but abrogating other cephalosporin resistance. Mutants of ceftazidime-susceptible strains were not sequenced, but phenotypes suggested altered drug accumulation or, for Enterobacter cloacae only, AmpC derepression. In further experiments, avibactam reduced, but did not abolish, selection of AmpC-derepressed Enterobacteriaceae by ceftazidime. Conclusions: Most mutants of AmpC-derepressed Enterobacteriaceae had structural mutations in ampC; those of ESBL producers mostly had genetic modifications outside ß-lactamase genes, commonly affecting uptake, efflux, or ß-lactamase quantity. The clinical significance of these observations remains to be determined.

Potential of high-dose cefepime/tazobactam against multiresistant Gram-negative pathogens.

BACKGROUND: Early ß-lactamase inhibitors were combined with established penicillins, but different combinations may be more appropriate to counter current ß-lactamase threats, with development facilitated by the US Generating Antibiotic Incentives Now (GAIN) Act. Cefepime/tazobactam is especially attractive, combining an AmpC-stable cephalosporin with a clinically established inhibitor, active against ESBLs and suitable for high-dose administration. METHODS: Organisms (n = 563) were clinical isolates submitted to the UK national reference laboratory. MICs were determined by CLSI agar dilution with tazobactam at 4 mg/L and, for a subset, at 8 mg/L. RESULTS: Cefepime/tazobactam 8 + 4 mg/L achieved coverage of 96%-100% of Enterobacteriaceae with penicillinases, AmpC, ESBL, K1 or OXA-48 ß-lactamases. Even at 1 + 4 mg/L, the combination inhibited >94% of isolates with penicillinases, AmpC enzymes or ESBLs. Most Enterobacteriaceae with KPC and NDM carbapenemase were resistant at current cefepime breakpoints but 80% of those with VIM types were susceptible at 8 + 4 mg/L. Tazobactam did little to potentiate cefepime against non-fermenter groups, though gains were seen against AmpC-producing Acinetobacter spp. and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Increasing the tazobactam concentration to 8 mg/L gave further small increases in activity against Enterobacteriaceae groups. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose cefepime/tazobactam, justifying an 8 + 4 or 8 + 8 mg/L breakpoint, can achieve a carbapenem-like spectrum, with some additional coverage of OXA-48 (and maybe VIM) Enterobacteriaceae. Clinical evaluation is warranted.

Prevalence of carbapenem resistance and carbapenemase production among Enterobacteriaceae isolated from urine in the UK: results of the UK infection-Carbapenem Resistance Evaluation Surveillance Trial (iCREST-UK).

Objectives: Although carbapenem susceptibility testing has been recommended for all Enterobacteriaceae from clinical specimens, for practical reasons a carbapenem is not included in many primary antibiotic panels for urine specimens. The 'iCREST' study sought carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) in routine urine specimens yielding Gram-negative growth in five diagnostic laboratories in the UK. We sought also to compare locally and centrally determined MICs of meropenem and ceftazidime/avibactam. Methods: Positive growth from up to 2000 urine specimens per laboratory was plated onto chromID® CARBA SMART agar. Suspected CPE colonies were tested locally by Etest for susceptibility to meropenem and ceftazidime/avibactam, and referred to central laboratories for PCR confirmation of CPE status and microbroth MIC determination. Results: Twenty-two suspected CPE were identified from 7504 urine specimens. Ten were confirmed by PCR to have NDM (5), IMP (2), KPC (2) or OXA-48-like (1) carbapenemases. Locally determined ceftazidime/avibactam MICs showed complete categorical agreement with those determined centrally by microbroth methodology. The seven ceftazidime/avibactam-resistant isolates (MICs ≥256 mg/L) had NDM or IMP metallo-carbapenemases. Conclusions: The frequency of confirmed CPE among Gram-negative urinary isolates was low, at 0.13% (10/7504), but CPE were found in urines at all five participating sites and the diversity of carbapenemase genes detected reflected the complex epidemiology of CPE in the UK. These data can inform local policies about the cost-effectiveness and clinical value of testing Gram-negative bacteria from urine specimens routinely against a carbapenem as part of patient management and/or infection prevention and control strategies.

In vitro activity of cefepime/zidebactam (WCK 5222) against Gram-negative bacteria.

Objectives: Diazabicyclooctanes (DBOs) inhibit class A, class C and some class D ß-lactamases. A few also bind PBP2, conferring direct antibacterial activity and a ß-lactamase-independent 'enhancer' effect, potentiating ß-lactams targeting PBP3. We tested a novel DBO, zidebactam, combined with cefepime. Methods: CLSI agar dilution MICs were determined with cefepime/zidebactam in a chequerboard format. Bactericidal activity was also measured. Results: Zidebactam MICs were ≤2 mg/L (mostly 0.12-0.5 mg/L) for most Escherichia coli , Klebsiella , Citrobacter and Enterobacter spp., but were >32 mg/L for Proteeae, most Serratia and a few E. coli , Klebsiella and Enterobacter/Citrobacter . The antibacterial activity of zidebactam dominated chequerboard studies for Enterobacteriaceae, but potentiation of cefepime was apparent for zidebactam-resistant isolates with class A and C enzymes, illustrating ß-lactamase inhibition. Overall, cefepime/zidebactam inhibited almost all Enterobacteriaceae with AmpC, ESBL, K1, KPC and OXA-48-like ß-lactamases at 1 + 1 mg/L and also 29 of 35 isolates with metallo-carbapenemases, including several resistant to zidebactam alone. Zidebactam MICs for 36 of 50 Pseudomonas aeruginosa were 4-16 mg/L, and the majority of AmpC, metallo-ß-lactamase-producing and cystic fibrosis isolates were susceptible to cefepime/zidebactam at 8 + 8 mg/L. Zidebactam MICs for Acinetobacter baumannii and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia were >32 mg/L; potentiation of cefepime was frequent for S. maltophilia , but minimal for A. baumannii . Kill curve results largely supported MICs. Conclusions: Zidebactam represents a second triple-action DBO following RG6080, with lower MICs for Enterobacteriaceae and P. aeruginosa . Clinical evaluation of cefepime/zidebactam must critically evaluate the reliance that can be placed on this direct antibacterial activity and on the enhancer effect as well as ß-lactamase inhibition.

WCK 4234, a novel diazabicyclooctane potentiating carbapenems against Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas and Acinetobacter with class A, C and D ß-lactamases.

Background: Several diazabicyclooctanes (DBOs) are under development as inhibitors of class A and C ß-lactamases. Inhibition of OXA (class D) carbapenemases is variable, with those of Acinetobacter spp. remaining notably resistant. We describe a novel DBO, WCK 4234 (Wockhardt), with distinctive activity against OXA carbapenemases. Methods: MICs of imipenem and meropenem were determined by CLSI agar dilution with WCK 4234 added at 4 or 8 mg/L. Test organisms were clinical Enterobacteriaceae, Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with carbapenemases or carbapenem resistance via porin loss plus AmpC or ESBL activity. AmpC mutants were also tested. Results: WCK 4234, which lacked direct antibacterial activity, strongly potentiated imipenem and meropenem against Enterobacteriaceae with OXA-48/OXA-181 or KPC enzymes, or with combinations of impermeability and AmpC or ESBL activity, with MICs reduced to ≤2 mg/L in almost all cases. Carbapenems likewise were potentiated against P. aeruginosa ( n = 2) with OXA-181 enzyme, with MICs reduced from 64-128 to 2-8 mg/L and against A. baumannii with OXA carbapenemases, particularly OXA-23 or hyperproduced OXA-51, with MICs reduced to ≤2 mg/L for 9/10 acinetobacters with OXA-23 enzyme. Carbapenems were not potentiated against Enterobacteriaceae or non-fermenters with metallo-ß-lactamases. Conclusions: WCK 4234 distinctively overcame resistance mediated by OXA-type carbapenemases, including those of A. baumannii . It behaved similarly to other DBOs against strains with KPC carbapenemases or combinations of impermeability and ESBL or AmpC activity.

AmpC ß-lactamase induction by avibactam and relebactam.

BACKGROUND: Diazabicyclooctanes, e.g. avibactam and relebactam, are a new class of ß-lactamase inhibitors. Their spectrum includes AmpC enzymes, but it is important to understand whether they also induce these enzymes. METHODS: Levels of ampC mRNA were measured by RT-PCR during 4 h of exposure of Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter freundii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 5 strains per species) to avibactam, relebactam and cefoxitin at 0, 1, 4 and 32 mg/L. The method had low precision compared with conventional specific-activity-based induction assays, which are impracticable for inhibitors. Accordingly, induction was only considered to be significant if induction ratios >10 were found at two consecutive time intervals, with 'strong induction' if one or more of these ratios was >100. RESULTS: Cefoxitin, as expected, gave concentration-dependent induction for all strains, with strong induction for 13/15. At the other extreme, relebactam caused no significant induction for any strain. Avibactam gave strain-variable results, with strong concentration-dependent induction for 2/5 E. cloacae and 2/5 P. aeruginosa, but little or no induction for the other strains, including all the C. freundii strains. CONCLUSIONS: Avibactam, but not relebactam, had some strain-variable ability to induce AmpC enzymes, though at concentrations (32 mg/L) above those reached in the patient.