This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Katz, K. C.
Right arrow Articles by Low, D. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Katz, K. C.
Right arrow Articles by Low, D. E.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, July 2003, p. 2370-2372, Vol. 47, No. 7
0066-4804/03/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.7.2370-2372.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Emergence of Macrolide Resistance in Throat Culture Isolates of Group A Streptococci in Ontario, Canada, in 2001

Kevin C. Katz,1,2 Allison J. McGeer,1,2 Carla L. Duncan,1 Aisha Ashi-Sulaiman,1 Barbara M. Willey,1 Alicia Sarabia,3 Jacquie McCann,3 Sylvia Pong-Porter,1 Yana Rzayev,1 Joyce S. de Azavedo,1,2 and Donald E. Low1,2*

Toronto Medical Laboratories/Mount Sinai Hospital Department of Microbiology,1 University of Toronto,2 MDS Laboratories, Toronto, Ontario, Canada3

Received 6 January 2003/ Returned for modification 25 March 2003/ Accepted 26 April 2003


arrow
ABSTRACT
 
Of 500 group A streptococci isolated from pharyngeal swabs, 72 (14.4%) were macrolide resistant, compared to 2.1% in 1997. Of these, 66 (92%) were of the M phenotype and 6 (8.3%) were of the MLS phenotype. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis found that two clones, with patterns identical to those of serotypes M1 and M4, accounted for 19.4 and 68.1% of the macrolide-resistant isolates, respectively.


arrow
TEXT
 
Increasing macrolide resistance of group A streptococci (GAS) has been observed worldwide during the last decade. Resistance rates in North America have been <3% until recently (4, 8).

In this study, we looked at the prevalence of macrolide resistance in community GAS throat isolates from southern Ontario and determined their mechanisms of resistance. The prevalence of macrolide resistance was compared to rates in GAS isolates obtained in 1997 from the same patient population and region (4). MDS Laboratories, Canada, a private laboratory serving community physicians throughout southern Ontario and representing a population base of 6 million people, collected 500 consecutive GAS throat isolates during the fall of 2001. Only one specimen per patient was included. Strains were identified with a Prolex Streptococcal Grouping Latex Kit (Pro-Lab Diagnostics, Austin, Tex.). Erythromycin-resistant strains were initially identified by disk diffusion on Mueller-Hinton agar supplemented with 5% sheep blood with 15-µg erythromycin disks (Becton Dickinson, Cockeysville, Md.) in accordance with NCCLS guidelines (12). Resistance identified by disk diffusion testing was verified by broth microdilution in accordance with NCCLS guidelines (11). Susceptibility of isolates to penicillin, erythromycin, clindamycin, tetracycline, linezolid, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, vancomycin, and telithromycin for erythromycin-resistant strains was determined by broth microdilution susceptibility testing.

Two principal mechanisms are responsible for acquired erythromycin resistance in GAS: target site modification and active efflux. Target site modification is most often due to N6 dimethylation of an adenine residue (A2058) in the peptidyl transferase circle of 23S rRNA domain V through the action of a family of enzymes encoded by erm class genes. Methylation results in reduced binding of and coresistance to macrolide, lincosamide, and streptogramin B (MLS) antibiotics. MLS resistance can be expressed either constitutively (cMLS phenotype) or inducibly (iMLS phenotype). In Streptococcus pyogenes, it is mediated by two classes of methylase genes, the conventional erm(B) genes and the recently described erm(TR) genes, hereafter designated erm(A) in accordance with recently accepted nomenclature (14).

Active efflux is the other major resistance mechanism for macrolide antibiotics (23). Only the 14- and 15-membered macrolides are affected (thus, M resistance), and resistance is usually low level. M resistance is mediated in S. pyogenes by the mef(A) gene.

MLS and M phenotypes of erythromycin-resistant strains were determined by double-disk diffusion testing (6). Erythromycin (15 µg) and clindamycin (2 µg) disks were placed on plates approximately 12 mm apart, and the plates were incubated overnight at 37°C in 5% CO2. The absence of a significant zone of inhibition around the two disks was taken to indicate the cMLS phenotype, blunting of the clindamycin zone of inhibition proximal to the erythromycin disk was taken to indicate the iMLS phenotype, and susceptibility to clindamycin with no blunting of the zone of inhibition around the clindamycin disk was taken to indicate the M phenotype.

All isolates erythromycin resistant by MIC testing were characterized by PCR to detect the presence of mef(A), erm(B), and/or erm(A) genes with published primer sequences and in accordance with previously described methodology (4, 17).

Isolates were typed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) after digestion with SfiI as described by Murray et al. (10). Strains were considered to be of the same PFGE type if the patterns had three or fewer different bands (18). M typing was performed at the National Centre for Streptococcus reference laboratory in Edmonton, Alberta, by standard methodology (5). IMS HEALTH, Canada, provided an estimate of the total number of antibiotic prescriptions dispensed in Canadian retail pharmacies on the basis of a representative sample of 2,000 pharmacies stratified by type, size, and province. Statistical comparisons of resistance rates were done with a Yates-corrected chi-square test with Epi Info 2000 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga.).

Of the 500 isolates tested, 72 (14.4%) were found to be erythromycin resistant by disk diffusion testing. All of these were also found to be resistant by broth microdilution testing. A total of 91.5% of the resistant isolates consisted of two clones as determined by PFGE. A total of 59 (16%) of the patients <16 years of age carried a macrolide-resistant GAS, compared with 13 (10%) of those ≥16 years of age (P > 0.14). The prevalence of resistance in this study was significantly greater than in a similar study carried out in 1997 (4). That surveillance study had the same design and patient population and was carried out at the same laboratory as this study. In the 5-year period, macrolide resistance rates increased by more than sixfold (2.1% in 1997 to 14.4% in 2001 [P < 0.0001]) (Fig. 1).



View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1. Macrolide use and evolving GAS macrolide resistance. Macrolide usage trends are plotted along the left y axis in numbers of prescriptions per 100,000 people. Macrolide resistance rates (percent) are plotted along the right y axis. EryR, erythromycin resistance.

Others in the United States have also documented increasing rates of resistance. York et al. (21) reported erythromycin resistance rates of 32% among isolates from patients with invasive disease and 9% among pharyngeal isolates obtained between 1994 and 1995 in the San Francisco, Calif., area. Martin et al. (9) described an outbreak of a macrolide-resistant clone of GAS that, within a few months, had spread among schoolchildren in Pittsburgh, Pa. Between October 1998 and May 2000, none of the GAS isolates studied were resistant to macrolide antibiotics. Between October 2000 and May 2001, however, no less than 48% of the isolates were resistant. This high rate was due to a single M6 clone. Shulman et al. (15) reported findings from a surveillance study in 2000 that included GAS isolates from children in geographically diverse sites. Data for the 2000 to 2001 isolates indicated that the rate of macrolide resistance was approximately 7.4%. Critchley et al. (3), in 1999, found that 6.2% of 2,742 GAS isolates collected from 324 clinical laboratories were resistant to macrolides.

In Quebec, Canada, Weiss et al. (20) characterized a total of 496 GAS strains isolated from patients with pharyngitis in five acute-care hospitals between September and December 1998. The overall resistance rate was 4.6% but varied from 0% in rural areas to 9.4% in Montreal. Of the 23 strains showing resistance to erythromycin, 15 (65%) had the same PFGE pattern. They were of serotype M28 and harbored the erm(A) gene, suggesting the spread of a single clone.

It is clear that macrolide resistance rates are climbing internationally. Our study and others, mentioned above, demonstrate that resistant clones enter communities and can lead to rapid and significant increases in resistance rates. Whether the clones are transiently present in the community or whether they remain for long periods of time remains unclear.

In Canada, there has been a reduction in the number of erythromycin prescriptions from 11.3/100 patients per year in 1995 to 2.9/100 patients per year in 2001 but an increase in the number of clarithromycin and azithromycin prescriptions from 3.9 to 12.2/100 patients per year over the same time period (Fig. 1). Data for the Province of Ontario are very similar to the national data. Several studies have shown an association with increasing macrolide use and resistance in pneumococci (7, 13). Baquero (1) applied pharmacodynamic concepts to suggest that bacterial exposure to low and prolonged concentrations of macrolides may have a role in the selection of resistance. Analysis of macrolide prescribing and resistance patterns indicated a correlation between increasing macrolide resistance and the increased use of newer, long-acting macrolides.

Of the 72 erythromycin-resistant isolates, 66 (91.5%) were of the M phenotype, all of which possessed the mef(A) gene. Those of the cMLS phenotype and one of the iMLS phenotype were found to possess the erm(B) gene. The remaining four of the iMLS phenotype were found to possess the erm(A) gene. Erythromycin MICs ranged from 0.06 to >32 µg/ml. No strains were resistant to penicillin, levofloxacin, vancomycin, or linezolid. Three isolates were resistant to tetracycline: one that harbored mef(A), one with erm(A), and one with erm(B). For one isolate, the telithromycin MIC was >1 µg/ml (i.e., 4 µg/ml) and the strain harbored erm(B). The MICs of representative antibiotics are shown in Table 1.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1. Distribution of in vitro susceptibility results for 72 erythromycin-resistant GAS isolates

Telithromycin, a new ketolide, had reduced activity against isolates that were resistant to the macrolides because of efflux encoded by mef(A) and target site modification encoded by erm(B) compared to erythromycin-susceptible isolates and isolates that were macrolide resistant because of the presence of erm(A) (Table 1). Although the mechanism is unclear, similar findings have been noted by others.

We were able to characterize all 72 erythromycin-resistant isolates by PFGE (4, 22). Each of the six erm(A)- or erm(B)-containing strains constituted a unique PFGE type, and there were five different M types. Among the 66 mef(A)-containing strains, five different clones were identified by PFGE: 46 isolates with pattern A (M type 4), 14 with pattern B (M type 1), 4 with pattern C (M type 12), and 1 each with two other patterns (1 with pattern M2 and 1 with pattern M75). These data suggest that the emergence of macrolide resistance in southern Ontario is due primarily to the dissemination of a limited number of clones. Patterns A (M4) and B (M1) accounted for 65 and 19% of the macrolide-resistant isolates, respectively.

The outcome of the treatment of pharyngitis with a macrolide when the infecting GAS isolate is macrolide resistant is uncertain, although some studies have found higher than expected failure rates (19). The Infectious Diseases Society of America recommends laboratory confirmation of the clinical diagnosis by means of either throat culture or a rapid antigen detection test (2). A subcommittee of the American College of Physicians and the American Society of Internal Medicine, in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, advocates the use of a clinical algorithm alone, in lieu of microbiologic testing, for confirmation of the diagnosis in adults for whom the suspicion of streptococcal infection is high (16). However, with increasing rates of resistance, pharyngeal cultures may be necessary to determine the optimal therapy.


arrow
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
This work was supported in part by the Canadian Bacterial Diseases Network.


arrow
FOOTNOTES
 
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Microbiology, Rm. 1483, Mount Sinai Hospital, 600 University Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1X5. Phone: (416) 586-4435. Fax: (416) 586-8746. E-mail: dlow{at}mtsinai.on.ca. Back


arrow
REFERENCES
 
    1
  1. Baquero, F. 1999. Evolving resistance patterns of Streptococcus pneumoniae: a link with long-acting macrolide consumption? J. Chemother. 11(Suppl. 1):35-43.
    2. 2
  2. Bisno, A. L., M. A. Gerber, J. M. Gwaltney, Jr., E. L. Kaplan, and R. H. Schwartz. 2002. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of group A streptococcal pharyngitis. Clin. Infect. Dis. 35:113-125.[CrossRef][Medline]
    3. 3
  3. Critchley, I. A., D. F. Sahm, C. Thornsberry, R. S. Blosser-Middleton, M. E. Jones, and J. A. Karlowsky. 2002. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of Streptococcus pyogenes isolated from respiratory and skin and soft tissue infections: United States LIBRA surveillance data from 1999. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 42:129-135.[CrossRef][Medline]
    4. 4
  4. De Azavedo, J. C., R. H. Yeung, D. J. Bast, C. L. Duncan, S. B. Borgia, and D. E. Low. 1999. Prevalence and mechanisms of macrolide resistance in clinical isolates of group A streptococci from Ontario, Canada. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43:2144-2147.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    5. 5
  5. Demers, B., A. E. Simor, H. Vellend, P. M. Schlievert, S. Byrne, F. Jamieson, S. Walmsley, and D. E. Low. 1993. Severe invasive group A streptococcal infections in Ontario, Canada: 1987-1991. Clin. Infect. Dis. 16:792-800.[Medline]
    6. 6
  6. Giovanetti, E., M. P. Montanari, M. Mingoia, and P. E. Varaldo. 1999. Phenotypes and genotypes of erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pyogenes strains in Italy and heterogeneity of inducibly resistant strains. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43:1935-1940.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    7. 7
  7. Hyde, T. B., K. Gay, D. S. Stephens, D. J. Vugia, M. Pass, S. Johnson, N. L. Barrett, W. Schaffner, P. R. Cieslak, P. S. Maupin, E. R. Zell, J. H. Jorgensen, R. R. Facklam, and C. G. Whitney. 2001. Macrolide resistance among invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates. JAMA 286:1857-1862.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    8. 8
  8. Kaplan, E. L., D. R. Johnson, M. C. Del Rosario, and D. L. Horn. 1999. Susceptibility of group A beta-hemolytic streptococci to thirteen antibiotics: examination of 301 strains isolated in the United States between 1994 and 1997. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 18:1069-1072.[CrossRef][Medline]
    9. 9
  9. Martin, J. M., M. Green, K. A. Barbadora, and E. R. Wald. 2002. Erythromycin-resistant group A streptococci in schoolchildren in Pittsburgh. N. Engl. J. Med. 346:1200-1206.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    10. 10
  10. Murray, B. E., K. V. Singh, J. D. Heath, B. R. Sharma, and G. M. Weinstock. 1990. Comparison of genomic DNAs of different enterococcal isolates using restriction endonucleases with infrequent recognition sites. J. Clin. Microbiol. 28:2059-2063.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    11. 11
  11. NCCLS. 2003. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically, 5th ed. Approved standard M7-A5. NCCLS, Wayne, Pa.
    12. 12
  12. NCCLS. 2003. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests, 7th ed. Approved standard M2-A7. NCCLS, Wayne, Pa.
    13. 13
  13. Pihlajamaki, M., P. Kotilainen, T. Kaurila, T. Klaukka, E. Palva, and P. Huovinen. 2001. Macrolide-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae and use of antimicrobial agents. Clin. Infect. Dis. 33:483-488.[CrossRef][Medline]
    14. 14
  14. Roberts, M. C., J. Sutcliffe, P. Courvalin, L. B. Jensen, J. Rood, and H. Seppala. 1999. Nomenclature for macrolide and macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance determinants. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43:2823-2830.[Free Full Text]
    15. 15
  15. Shulman, S. T., R. Tanz, and W. Kabat. 2002. Erythromycin-resistant group A streptococci. N. Engl. J .Med. 347:614-615.[Free Full Text]
    16. 16
  16. Snow, V., C. Mottur-Pilson, R. J. Cooper, and J. R. Hoffman. 2001. Principles of appropriate antibiotic use for acute pharyngitis in adults. Ann. Intern. Med. 134:506-508.[Free Full Text]
    17. 17
  17. Sutcliffe, J., T. Grebe, A. Tait-Kamradt, and L. Wondrack. 1996. Detection of erythromycin-resistant determinants by PCR. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 40:2562-2566.[Abstract]
    18. 18
  18. Tenover, F. C., R. D. Arbeit, R. V. Goering, P. A. Mickelsen, B. E. Murray, D. H. Persing, and B. Swaminathan. 1995. Interpreting chromosomal DNA restriction patterns produced by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis: criteria for bacterial strain typing. J. Clin. Microbiol. 33:2233-2239.[Medline]
    19. 19
  19. Varaldo, P. E., E. A. Debbia, G. Nicoletti, D. Pavesio, S. Ripa, G. C. Schito, and G. Tempera. 1999. Nationwide survey in Italy of treatment of Streptococcus pyogenes pharyngitis in children: influence of macrolide resistance on clinical and microbiological outcomes. Clin. Infect. Dis. 29:869-873.[Medline]
    20. 20
  20. Weiss, K., J. de Azavedo, C. Restieri, L. A. Galarneau, M. Gourdeau, P. Harvey, J. F. Paradis, K. Salim, and D. E. Low. 2001. Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of macrolide-resistant group A Streptococcus strains in the Province of Quebec, Canada. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 47:345-348.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    21. 21
  21. York, M. K., L. Gibbs, F. Perdreau-Remington, and G. F. Brooks. 1999. Characterization of antimicrobial resistance in Streptococcus pyogenes isolates from the San Francisco Bay area of northern California. J. Clin. Microbiol. 37:1727-1731.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
    22. 22
  22. Zampaloni, C., L. A. Vitali, M. Prenna, M. A. Toscano, G. Tempera, and S. Ripa. 2002. Erythromycin resistance in Italian isolates of Streptococcus pyogenes and correlations with pulsed-field gel electrophoresis analysis. Microb. Drug Resist. 8:39-44.[CrossRef][Medline]
    23. 23
  23. Zhong, P., and V. D. Shortridge. 2000. The role of efflux in macrolide resistance. Drug Resist. Updates 3:325-329.[CrossRef][Medline]

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, July 2003, p. 2370-2372, Vol. 47, No. 7
0066-4804/03/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.7.2370-2372.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Casey, J. R. (2007). Selecting the Optimal Antibiotic in the Treatment of Group A {beta}-Hemolytic Streptococci Pharyngitis. CLIN PEDIATR 46: 25S-35S [Abstract]  
  • Marcy, S. M. (2007). Treatment Options for Streptococcal Pharyngitis. CLIN PEDIATR 46: 36S-45S [Abstract]  
  • Figueiredo, T. A., Aguiar, S. I., Melo-Cristino, J., Ramirez, M. (2006). DNA Methylase Activity as a Marker for the Presence of a Family of Phage-Like Elements Conferring Efflux-Mediated Macrolide Resistance in Streptococci. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 50: 3689-3694 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Robinson, D. A., Sutcliffe, J. A., Tewodros, W., Manoharan, A., Bessen, D. E. (2006). Evolution and global dissemination of macrolide-resistant group a streptococci.. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 50: 2903-2911 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Silva-Costa, C., Ramirez, M., Melo-Cristino, J., the Portuguese Surveillance Group for the Study of, (2005). Rapid Inversion of the Prevalences of Macrolide Resistance Phenotypes Paralleled by a Diversification of T and emm Types among Streptococcus pyogenes in Portugal. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 49: 2109-2111 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • McGregor, K. F., Spratt, B. G. (2005). Identity and Prevalence of Multilocus Sequence Typing-Defined Clones of Group A Streptococci within a Hospital Setting. J. Clin. Microbiol. 43: 1963-1967 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Wierzbowski, A. K., Swedlo, D., Boyd, D., Mulvey, M., Nichol, K. A., Hoban, D. J., Zhanel, G. G. (2005). Molecular Epidemiology and Prevalence of Macrolide Efflux Genes mef(A) and mef(E) in Streptococcus pneumoniae Obtained in Canada from 1997 to 2002. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 49: 1257-1261 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Desjardins, M., Delgaty, K. L., Ramotar, K., Seetaram, C., Toye, B. (2004). Prevalence and Mechanisms of Erythromycin Resistance in Group A and Group B Streptococcus: Implications for Reporting Susceptibility Results. J. Clin. Microbiol. 42: 5620-5623 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Bingen, E., Bidet, P., Mihaila-Amrouche, L., Doit, C., Forcet, S., Brahimi, N., Bouvet, A., Cohen, R. (2004). Emergence of Macrolide-Resistant Streptococcus pyogenes Strains in French Children. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 48: 3559-3562 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Kim, S., Lee, N. Y. (2004). Epidemiology and antibiotic resistance of group A streptococci isolated from healthy schoolchildren in Korea. J Antimicrob Chemother 54: 447-450 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Katz, K. C.
Right arrow Articles by Low, D. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Katz, K. C.
Right arrow Articles by Low, D. E.

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»