Plasencia V, Borrell N, Maciá M D, Moya B, Pérez J L, Oliver A
Servicio de Microbiología and Unidad de Investigación, Hospital Son Dureta, Instituto Universitario de Investigación en Ciencias de la Salud, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007 Jul;51(7):2574-81. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00174-07. Epub 2007 Apr 30.
We studied the mechanisms and dynamics of the development of resistance to ceftazidime (CAZ) alone or combined with tobramycin (TOB) or ciprofloxacin (CIP) in vitro and in vivo (using a mouse model of lung infection with human antibiotic regimens). Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain PAO1 and its hypermutable derivative PAODeltamutS were used, and the results were compared with those previously obtained with CIP, TOB, and CIP plus TOB (CIP-TOB) under the same conditions. An important (200-fold) amplification of the number of resistant mutant cells was documented for PAODeltamutS-infected mice that were under CAZ treatment compared to the number for mice that received placebo, whereas the median number of resistant mutant cells was below the detection limits for mice infected by PAO1. These results were intermediate between the high amplification with CIP (50,000-fold) and the low amplification with TOB (10-fold). All CAZ-resistant single mutant cells selected in vitro or in vivo hyperproduced AmpC. On the other hand, the three combinations studied were found to be highly effective in the prevention of in vivo resistance development in mice infected with PAODeltamutS, although the highest therapeutic efficacy (in terms of mortality and total bacterial load reduction) compared to those of the individual regimens was obtained with CIP-TOB and the lowest was with CAZ-CIP. Nevertheless, mutant cells that were resistant to the three combinations tested were readily selected in vitro for PAODeltamutS (mutation rates from 1.2 x 10(-9) to 5.8 x 10(-11)) but not for PAO1, highlighting the potential risk for antimicrobial resistance development associated with the presence of hypermutable strains, even when combined therapy was used. All five independent CAZ-TOB-resistant PAODeltamutS double mutants studied presented the same resistance mechanism (AmpC hyperproduction plus an aminoglycoside resistance mechanism not related to MexXY), whereas four different combinations of resistance mechanisms were documented for the five CAZ-CIP-resistant double mutants.
我们在体外和体内(使用人类抗生素治疗方案的小鼠肺部感染模型)研究了单独使用头孢他啶(CAZ)或与妥布霉素(TOB)或环丙沙星(CIP)联合使用时对其耐药性产生的机制和动态变化。使用了铜绿假单胞菌菌株PAO1及其高突变衍生物PAODeltamutS,并将结果与之前在相同条件下使用CIP、TOB以及CIP加TOB(CIP - TOB)所获得的结果进行比较。与接受安慰剂的小鼠相比,记录到接受CAZ治疗的PAODeltamutS感染小鼠中耐药突变细胞数量有重要的(200倍)扩增,而PAO1感染小鼠的耐药突变细胞中位数数量低于检测限。这些结果介于CIP的高扩增(50,000倍)和TOB的低扩增(10倍)之间。在体外或体内选择的所有对CAZ耐药的单突变细胞均超量产生AmpC。另一方面,尽管与单一治疗方案相比,CIP - TOB的治疗效果最高(就死亡率和总细菌载量降低而言),CAZ - CIP最低,但所研究的三种联合用药在预防PAODeltamutS感染小鼠体内耐药性产生方面被发现非常有效。然而,对所测试的三种联合用药耐药的突变细胞在体外很容易被PAODeltamutS选择出来(突变率从1.2×10⁻⁹到5.8×10⁻¹¹),但PAO1却不会,这突出了即使使用联合治疗,高突变菌株的存在仍与抗菌药物耐药性产生相关的潜在风险。所研究的所有五个独立的对CAZ - TOB耐药的PAODeltamutS双突变体都呈现相同的耐药机制(AmpC超量产生加上一种与MexXY无关的氨基糖苷类耐药机制),而五个对CAZ - CIP耐药的双突变体记录到了四种不同的耐药机制组合。