Department of Applied Biology and Chemical Technology, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
State Key Laboratory of Chemical Biology and Drug Discovery, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Med Res Rev. 2020 May;40(3):1103-1116. doi: 10.1002/med.21647. Epub 2019 Nov 20.
Bacterial infections lead to high morbidity and mortality globally. While current therapies against bacteria often employ antibiotics, most bacterial pathogens can form biofilms and prevent effective treatment of infections. Biofilm cells can aggregate and encased themselves in a self-secreted protective exopolymeric matrix, to reduce the penetration by antibiotics. Biofilm formation is mediated by c-di-GMP signaling, the ubiquitous secondary messenger in bacteria. Synthesis of c-di-GMP by diguanylate cyclases leads to biofilm formation via the loss of motility, increased surface attachment, and production of biofilm matrix, whereas c-di-GMP degradation by phosphodiesterases causes biofilm dispersal to new sites via increased bacterial motility and matrix breakdown. The highly variable nature of biofilm development and antimicrobial tolerance imposes tremendous challenges in conventional antimicrobial therapies, indicating an imperative need to develop anti-biofilm drugs against biofilm infections. In this review, we focus on two main emergent approaches-active dispersal and disruption. While both approaches aim to demolish biofilms, we will discuss their fundamental differences and associated methods. Active dispersal of biofilms involves signaling the bacterial cells to leave the biofilm, where resident cells ditch their sessile lifestyle, gain motility and self-degrade their matrix. Biofilm disruption leads to direct matrix degradation that forcibly releases embedded biofilm cells. Without the protection of biofilm matrix, released bacterial cells are highly exposed to antimicrobials, leading to their eradication in biofilm infections. Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches will allow optimized utility with antimicrobials in clinical settings.
细菌感染在全球范围内导致高发病率和死亡率。虽然目前针对细菌的治疗方法通常采用抗生素,但大多数细菌病原体可以形成生物膜,从而阻止感染的有效治疗。生物膜细胞可以聚集并包裹在自我分泌的保护性聚合基质中,以减少抗生素的渗透。生物膜的形成由 c-di-GMP 信号转导介导,c-di-GMP 是细菌中普遍存在的二级信使。双鸟苷酸环化酶合成 c-di-GMP 会导致运动性丧失、表面附着增加和生物膜基质产生,从而导致生物膜形成,而磷酸二酯酶降解 c-di-GMP 会通过增加细菌运动性和基质分解导致生物膜分散到新部位。生物膜形成和抗微生物耐受性的高度可变性给传统抗微生物治疗带来了巨大挑战,这表明迫切需要开发针对生物膜感染的抗生物膜药物。在这篇综述中,我们重点介绍了两种主要的新兴方法——主动分散和破坏。虽然这两种方法都旨在破坏生物膜,但我们将讨论它们的根本区别和相关方法。生物膜的主动分散涉及向细菌细胞发出信号,使其离开生物膜,常驻细胞放弃其固着生活方式,获得运动性并自我降解其基质。生物膜破坏导致直接基质降解,强制释放嵌入的生物膜细胞。没有生物膜基质的保护,释放的细菌细胞极易受到抗生素的影响,从而在生物膜感染中被消灭。了解这两种方法的优缺点将允许在临床环境中优化抗生素的使用。