The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2019
ESBLs and resistance to ceftazidime/avibactam and ceftolozane/tazobactam combinations in Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ortiz de la Rosa José-Manuel, Nordmann Patrice, Poirel Laurent
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of the recently launched β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations ceftazidime/avibactam and ceftolozane/tazobactam against ESBL-producing Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains.
METHODS: A series of ESBL-encoding genes (blaTEM, blaSHV, blaCTX-M, blaVEB, blaPER, blaGES and blaBEL) was cloned and expressed in E. coli or P. aeruginosa recipient strains. Cultures of E. coli TOP10 harbouring recombinant plasmids and therefore producing the different ESBLs tested were grown in order to perform measurements of catalytic activities, using benzylpenicillin, ceftazidime and ceftolozane as substrates. IC50s were additionally determined for clavulanic acid, tazobactam and avibactam.
RESULTS: We showed here an overall better activity of ceftazidime/avibactam compared with ceftolozane/tazobactam toward ESBL-producing E. coli and P. aeruginosa. Several ESBLs of the GES, PER and BEL types conferred resistance to ceftolozane/tazobactam in E. coli and P. aeruginosa. For GES-6 and PER-1 producers, resistance to ceftolozane/tazobactam could be explained by a high hydrolysis of ceftolozane and a low activity of tazobactam as an inhibitor. On the other hand, PER-producing P. aeruginosa also exhibited resistance to ceftazidime/avibactam.
CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, the results show that the ESBL PER-1, which is widespread worldwide, may be a source of resistance to both ceftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibactam. Excellent activity of ceftazidime/avibactam was highlighted for both ESBL-producing E. coli and ESBL-producing P. aeruginosa.
METHODS: A series of ESBL-encoding genes (blaTEM, blaSHV, blaCTX-M, blaVEB, blaPER, blaGES and blaBEL) was cloned and expressed in E. coli or P. aeruginosa recipient strains. Cultures of E. coli TOP10 harbouring recombinant plasmids and therefore producing the different ESBLs tested were grown in order to perform measurements of catalytic activities, using benzylpenicillin, ceftazidime and ceftolozane as substrates. IC50s were additionally determined for clavulanic acid, tazobactam and avibactam.
RESULTS: We showed here an overall better activity of ceftazidime/avibactam compared with ceftolozane/tazobactam toward ESBL-producing E. coli and P. aeruginosa. Several ESBLs of the GES, PER and BEL types conferred resistance to ceftolozane/tazobactam in E. coli and P. aeruginosa. For GES-6 and PER-1 producers, resistance to ceftolozane/tazobactam could be explained by a high hydrolysis of ceftolozane and a low activity of tazobactam as an inhibitor. On the other hand, PER-producing P. aeruginosa also exhibited resistance to ceftazidime/avibactam.
CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, the results show that the ESBL PER-1, which is widespread worldwide, may be a source of resistance to both ceftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibactam. Excellent activity of ceftazidime/avibactam was highlighted for both ESBL-producing E. coli and ESBL-producing P. aeruginosa.