4.7 Article

Effect of MexXY Overexpression on Ceftobiprole Susceptibility in Pseudomonas aeruginosa

期刊

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY
卷 53, 期 7, 页码 2785-2790

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00018-09

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ceftobiprole, an anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus broad-spectrum cephalosporin, has activity (MIC for 50% of strains tested, <= 4 mu g/ml) against many Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains. A common mechanism of P. aeruginosa resistance to beta-lactams, including cefepime and ceftazidime, is efflux via increased expression of Mex pumps, especially MexAB. MexXY has differential substrate specificity, recognizing cefepime but not ceftazidime. In ceftobiprole clinical studies, paired isolates of P. aeruginosa from four subjects demonstrated ceftobiprole MICs of 2 to 4 mu g/ml at baseline but 16 mu g/ml posttreatment, unrelated to beta-lactamase levels. Within each pair, the level of mexXY RNA, but not mexAB, mexCD, and mexEF, increased by an average of 50-fold from baseline to posttreatment isolates. Sequencing of the negative regulatory gene mexZ indicated that each posttreatment isolate contained a mutation not present at baseline. mexXY expression as a primary ceftobiprole and cefepime resistance mechanism was further examined in isogenic pairs by using cloned mexXY and mexZ. Expression of cloned mexXY in strain PAO1 or in a baseline isolate increased the ceftobiprole MIC to that for the posttreatment isolate. In contrast, in posttreatment isolates, lowering mexXY expression via introduction of cloned mexZ decreased the ceftobiprole MIC to that for the baseline isolates. Similar changes were observed for cefepime. A spontaneous mutant selectively overexpressing mexXY displayed a fourfold elevation in its ceftobiprole MIC, while overexpression of mexAB, -CD, and -EF had a minimal effect. These data indicate that ceftobiprole, like cefepime, is an atypical beta-lactam that is a substrate for the MexXY efflux pump in P. aeruginosa.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据