Fuentes-Hernandez Ayari, Plucain Jessica, Gori Fabio, Pena-Miller Rafael, Reding Carlos, Jansen Gunther, Schulenburg Hinrich, Gudelj Ivana, Beardmore Robert
Centro de Ciencias Genómicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Cuernavaca, México.
Biosciences, Geoffrey Pope Building, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
PLoS Biol. 2015 Apr 8;13(4):e1002104. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002104. eCollection 2015 Apr.
We need to find ways of enhancing the potency of existing antibiotics, and, with this in mind, we begin with an unusual question: how low can antibiotic dosages be and yet bacterial clearance still be observed? Seeking to optimise the simultaneous use of two antibiotics, we use the minimal dose at which clearance is observed in an in vitro experimental model of antibiotic treatment as a criterion to distinguish the best and worst treatments of a bacterium, Escherichia coli. Our aim is to compare a combination treatment consisting of two synergistic antibiotics to so-called sequential treatments in which the choice of antibiotic to administer can change with each round of treatment. Using mathematical predictions validated by the E. coli treatment model, we show that clearance of the bacterium can be achieved using sequential treatments at antibiotic dosages so low that the equivalent two-drug combination treatments are ineffective. Seeking to treat the bacterium in testing circumstances, we purposefully study an E. coli strain that has a multidrug pump encoded in its chromosome that effluxes both antibiotics. Genomic amplifications that increase the number of pumps expressed per cell can cause the failure of high-dose combination treatments, yet, as we show, sequentially treated populations can still collapse. However, dual resistance due to the pump means that the antibiotics must be carefully deployed and not all sublethal sequential treatments succeed. A screen of 136 96-h-long sequential treatments determined five of these that could clear the bacterium at sublethal dosages in all replicate populations, even though none had done so by 24 h. These successes can be attributed to a collateral sensitivity whereby cross-resistance due to the duplicated pump proves insufficient to stop a reduction in E. coli growth rate following drug exchanges, a reduction that proves large enough for appropriately chosen drug switches to clear the bacterium.
我们需要找到提高现有抗生素效力的方法,考虑到这一点,我们从一个不同寻常的问题入手:抗生素剂量能低到什么程度却仍能观察到细菌清除效果?为了优化两种抗生素的联合使用,我们将在抗生素治疗的体外实验模型中观察到细菌清除的最低剂量作为区分对大肠杆菌最佳和最差治疗方法的标准。我们的目标是将由两种协同抗生素组成的联合治疗与所谓的序贯治疗进行比较,在序贯治疗中,每次治疗所选用的抗生素可能会发生变化。通过大肠杆菌治疗模型验证的数学预测,我们发现使用序贯治疗,在抗生素剂量低到等效的两药联合治疗无效的情况下,仍可实现细菌清除。为了在实际测试环境中治疗这种细菌,我们特意研究了一种大肠杆菌菌株,其染色体中编码了一种多药泵,该泵能将两种抗生素都排出细胞外。基因组扩增会增加每个细胞表达的泵的数量,从而导致高剂量联合治疗失败,然而,正如我们所展示的,序贯治疗的菌群仍会崩溃。不过,由于这种泵导致的双重耐药性意味着必须谨慎使用抗生素,并非所有亚致死剂量的序贯治疗都能成功。对136种为期96小时的序贯治疗进行筛选后,确定了其中五种治疗方法,即使在24小时时没有一种治疗方法能清除细菌,但它们在所有重复菌群中都能以亚致死剂量清除细菌。这些成功可归因于一种间接敏感性,即由于泵的复制导致的交叉耐药性不足以阻止药物更换后大肠杆菌生长速率的降低,这种降低幅度大到足以让适当选择的药物更换来清除细菌。