Office of Laboratory Animal Resources, University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; Department of Pathology, University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO;, Email:
Department of Pathology, University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; Deceased.
Comp Med. 2022 Apr 1;72(2):78-89. doi: 10.30802/AALAS-CM-21-000082. Epub 2022 Apr 4.
is an opportunistic pathogen of the skin of immunodeficient mice and is sensitive to oral antibiotics that reach therapeutic blood concentrations. However, prophylactic antibiotics are considered to be ineffective at preventing infection. In addition, the effect of on the skin microbiome (SM) of common immunodeficient mouse strains has yet to be characterized. Consequently, we evaluated whether oral prophylactic antibiotics prevent infection after inoculation. An infectious dose of was applied to the skin of Hsd:Athymic Nude (nude) and NOD. Cg-/SzJ (NSG) mice. Mice were then housed individually and assigned randomly to receive either untreated drinking water (+Abx-group) or prophylactic amoxicillin-clavulanic acid in the drinking water (0.375 mg/mL) for 14 d (+Abx+group). A third treatment group of each mouse strain was uninoculated and untreated (-Abx-group). Mice from all groups were serially sampled by using dermal swabs to monitor infection via quantitative real-time PCR and the SM via 16S rRNA sequence analysis. Fourteen days of prophylactic antibiotics prevented the perpetuation of skin infection in both strains. Only the combination of inoculation and oral antibiotics (+Abx+) significantly affected the SM of NSG mice at day 14; this effect resolved by the end of the study (day 70). In mice that did not receive antibiotics, significantly altered the SM of nude mice but not NSG mice at days 14 and 70. These findings demonstrate the potential benefit of prophylactic antibiotics for prevention of infection. However, indirect effect of antibiotics on commensal bacteria and potential effects on xenograft models must be considered.
是免疫缺陷小鼠皮肤的机会性病原体,对达到治疗血药浓度的口服抗生素敏感。然而,预防性抗生素被认为不能有效预防感染。此外,尚未对常见免疫缺陷小鼠品系的皮肤微生物组(SM)进行特征描述。因此,我们评估了口服预防性抗生素是否能预防接种后感染。将感染剂量的接种到 Hsd:Athymic Nude(裸鼠)和 NOD.Cg-/-SzJ(NSG)小鼠的皮肤上。然后将小鼠单独饲养,并随机分为未处理的饮用水(+Abx 组)或饮用水中的阿莫西林-克拉维酸预防性治疗(0.375 mg/mL)14 天(+Abx+组)。每组的第三个治疗组为未接种和未处理的(-Abx 组)。通过使用皮肤拭子对所有组的小鼠进行连续采样,通过定量实时 PCR 监测感染,并通过 16S rRNA 序列分析监测 SM。两种品系的 14 天预防性抗生素可防止持续感染。只有接种和口服抗生素的组合(+Abx+)在第 14 天显著影响 NSG 小鼠的 SM;这种影响在研究结束时(第 70 天)得到解决。在未接受抗生素的小鼠中,在第 14 天和第 70 天,显著改变了裸鼠但未改变 NSG 小鼠的 SM。这些发现表明预防性抗生素预防感染的潜在益处。然而,抗生素对共生细菌的间接影响以及对异种移植模型的潜在影响必须加以考虑。