Skip to main page content

• HOME
• Current Issue
• Archive
• Alerts
• About ASM
• Contact us
• Tech Support
• Journals.ASM.org

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Davis, K. A. Articles by Jorgensen, J. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Davis, K. A. Articles by Jorgensen, J. H.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, July 2005, p. 3059-3061, Vol. 49, No. 7
0066-4804/05/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AAC.49.7.3059-3061.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Induction of Telithromycin Resistance by Erythromycin in Isolates of Macrolide-Resistant Staphylococcus spp.

Kepler A. Davis,^1* Sharon A. Crawford,² Kristin R. Fiebelkorn,² and James H. Jorgensen²

Infectious Diseases Service, Department of Medicine, Brooke Army Medical Center, Ft. Sam Houston, Texas 78234,¹ Department of Pathology, The University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas 78229²

Received 24 November 2004/ Returned for modification 19 January 2005/ Accepted 3 March 2005

Top Abstract Text References

 
Staphylococcal isolates were examined for possible macrolide-inducible resistance to telithromycin. All macrolide-resistant isolates demonstrated telithromycin D-shaped zones. This result did not discriminate between resistance due to an efflux mechanism (msrA) or a ribosomal target modification (ermA or ermC). Inducible telithromycin resistance in staphylococci does not appear to be analogous to inducible clindamycin resistance.

Top Abstract Text References

 
Telithromycin is the first commercially available ketolide. Ketolides are a recently developed class of antimicrobial agents that belong to the macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B (MLS_B) family. Ketolides possess significant structural differences from macrolides, including a second site of interaction with the ribosome at domain II on the 23S rRNA of the 50S ribosomal subunit (4). This is in addition to the interaction at domain V, which is where 14- and 15-membered-ring macrolides act (2). These and other modifications improve the stability of ketolides in acidic environments, prevent the induction of MLS_B resistance, and maintain activity against organisms that develop inducible resistance to MLS_B antimicrobials (2). Mechanisms that confer resistance to MLS_B antimicrobials include target site modification and active antimicrobial efflux (1). Target site modification is encoded by constitutive or inducible erm genes (16) that may require exposure to subinhibitory concentrations of erythromycin for optimal expression (18). The active antimicrobial efflux pumps that have been described for Staphylococcus aureus are encoded by the msrA, msrB, and NorA genes (11, 16).

We previously reported a practical disk approximation method which identified 97% of S. aureus strains and 100% of coagulase-negative staphylococcus (CoNS) strains with inducible MLS_B resistance during routine disk diffusion susceptibility testing (6). A similar method involves placing erythromycin and clindamycin disks in close proximity on standard sheep blood agar plates used for verification of inoculum purity when broth-based susceptibility tests are performed (10). These tests are intended to detect strains with inducible MLS_B resistance in order to avoid potential clinical failures with clindamycin therapy (5, 7, 15, 17). The goal of the present study was to determine if inducible telithromycin resistance, like inducible clindamycin resistance, might occur in macrolide-resistant staphylococci.

A group of 100 S. aureus clinical isolates and 100 CoNS clinical isolates, some of which have been previously described (6), were selected for study. All isolates were macrolide resistant by standard Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI; formerly NCCLS) disk diffusion testing (14). An additional 10 S. aureus isolates that were susceptible to erythromycin were included. Standard CLSI disk diffusion testing (14) was performed on all isolates by use of Mueller-Hinton agar (Becton-Dickinson Microbiology Systems, Cockeysville, MD) with standard 15-µg erythromycin disks, 2-µg clindamycin disks, and 15-µg telithromycin disks (Becton-Dickinson). Two sets of three disks were placed on the same agar plate (Fig. 1). Each set consisted of a centrally placed erythromycin disk with either clindamycin or telithromycin disks placed at 20 mm and 26 mm on opposite sides of the erythromycin disk. Zone diameters were carefully measured and evaluated for the formation of a D-shaped zone (D zone) following incubation for 16 to 18 h at 35°C.

View larger version (134K): [in this window] [in a new window]

FIG. 1. S. aureus induction test result demonstrating positive induction tests for both clindamycin and telithromycin. Upper row, clindamycin disk (left), erythromycin disk (center), and clindamycin disk (right). Lower row, telithromycin disk (left), erythromycin disk (center), and telithromycin disk (right). For each row, the left disk is separated from the central disk by 20 mm, and the right disk is separated from the central disk by 26 mm.

A second method to assess possible inducible telithromycin resistance was performed on a subset of isolates by determining telithromycin MICs. This was completed by standard broth dilution testing (13) with and without the addition of a subinhibitory concentration of erythromycin (0.5 µg/ml). MIC testing was then repeated with the addition of one of three known efflux pump inhibitors: reserpine (10, 25, 50, and 100 µg/ml), 2,4-dinitrophenol (20 µg/ml), or carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP; 0.5 µg/ml) (all obtained from Sigma Chemical Company, St. Louis, MO) (8, 9, 12). Both reserpine and CCCP were initially dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA) prior to serial dilutions in sterile Mueller-Hinton broth (Becton-Dickinson). The reversal of macrolide-induced telithromycin MIC elevation in the presence of an efflux pump inhibitor would infer that resistance was due to active antimicrobial efflux.

Preparation of whole-cell DNA, PCR for the ermA, ermC, and msrA genes and detection of amplified DNA was completed as previously described (6). Control strains for disk diffusion tests and molecular analysis included S. aureus ATCC 25923 (macrolide and clindamycin susceptible; negative for ermA, ermC, and msrA), S. aureus RN1551 (containing ermA), S. aureus RN4220 (with plasmid pE194 containing ermC), and S. aureus RN4220 (with plasmid pAT10 containing msrA) (6).

Initial disk diffusion testing demonstrated that 74 S. aureus isolates and 45 CoNS isolates were susceptible to telithromycin (zone diameter of 22 mm) (Table 1), with all but two S. aureus isolates and three CoNS isolates susceptible to clindamycin (zone diameter of 21 mm). Unexpectedly, disk approximation testing revealed that all macrolide-resistant, telithromycin-susceptible staphylococcal isolates produced telithromycin D zones (Table 1 and Fig. 1). None of the erythromycin-susceptible S. aureus isolates demonstrated a flattening of the zones of inhibition. In contrast, inducible clindamycin resistance predicted the presence of an inducible erm gene, except for three CoNS isolates with msrA genes (Table 2). The telithromycin MIC of five selected S. aureus isolates with only the msrA genotype was 0.06 µg/ml, which increased to 0.5 µg/ml in the presence of a subinhibitory concentration of erythromycin (Table 3). Likewise, the telithromycin MIC was also induced by erythromycin for S. aureus isolates that contained only ermA or ermC. The negative-control strain, S. aureus ATCC 25923, did not demonstrate an elevated telithromycin MIC in the presence of erythromycin. The addition of reserpine, 2,4-dinitrophenol, or CCCP did not significantly decrease the induced telithromycin MICs.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]

TABLE 1. Staphylococcal resistance phenotypesc

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]

TABLE 2. Staphylococcal genotype results

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]

TABLE 3. MICs for select S. aureus isolates

All macrolide-resistant staphylococcal isolates in this study, irrespective of genotype, unexpectedly demonstrated positive telithromycin D-zone induction tests. Our previous study demonstrated that a positive macrolide induction test with clindamycin was a marker for those isolates that contained only a ribosomal-modification ermA or ermC gene and not the msrA efflux mechanism gene (6). A positive macrolide induction test with telithromycin did not discriminate between these resistance mechanisms. We initially postulated that inducible telithromycin resistance in these isolates was due to an alternate efflux pump that we had not identified. However, the addition of known inhibitors of staphylococcal efflux pumps did not reverse the erythromycin-induced telithromycin MICs, implying that either the pump was not affected by these inhibitors or there is an alternate mechanism of this inducible resistance. The mechanism of macrolide-induced telithromycin resistance may or may not be target site modification in those strains that contained ermA or ermC. Further work is needed to explain the exact mechanism of inducible telithromycin resistance observed in this study.

Regardless of the mechanism for this observation, we do not recommend routinely testing clinical isolates for inducible telithromycin resistance. It is unclear what, if any, clinical significance this observation provides, for two reasons. First, our results did not demonstrate a discriminating cause for the positive telithromycin D test, as is the case with the clindamycin D test (6). Second, to our knowledge, there have been no reports of clinical failure of telithromycin therapy for patients who have infections caused by telithromycin-susceptible, erythromycin-resistant isolates. It is concerning that the erythromycin induction of telithromycin resistance did elevate the telithromycin MIC above the resistance breakpoint (3) for one of the ermC-containing strains. Any potential clinical relevance of this phenomenon may become apparent with the expanded use of telithromycin. For now, clinical laboratories should not test for inducible telithromycin resistance unless further investigation reveals its cause and demonstrates that it is a relevant finding.

 
We thank Dee Shortridge for technical advice, Rosemary Paxson and University Hospital Laboratory personnel for collecting isolates, Fred C. Tenover and J. Sutcliff for providing reference strains, and Chong Cho and Jared Huisinga for technical assistance.

The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government. The corresponding author is an employee of the U.S. government. This work was prepared as part of his official duties, and as such, there is no copyright to be transferred.

 
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Infectious Disease Service, Department of Medicine, Brooke Army Medical Center, Ft. Sam Houston, TX 78234. Phone: (210) 916-5554. Fax: (210) 916-0388. E-mail: kepler.davis{at}amedd.army.mil.

Top Abstract Text References

 

1
1. Ackermann, G., and A. C. Rodloff. 2003. Drugs of the 21st century: telithromycin (HMR 3647)—the first ketolide. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 51:491-511.
2
2. Bryskier, A. 2000. Ketolides—telithromycin, an example of a new class of antibacterial agents. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 6:661-669.[CrossRef][Medline]
3
3. CLSI. 2005. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Fifteenth informational supplement M100-S15. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, Pa.
4
4. Douthwaite, S. 2001. Structure-activity relationships of ketolides vs. macrolides. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 7(Suppl. 3):11-17.[CrossRef]
5
5. Drinkovic, D., E. R. Fuller, K. P. Shore, D. J. Holland, and R. Ellis-Pegler. 2001. Clindamycin treatment of Staphylococcus aureus expressing inducible clindamycin resistance. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 48:315-316.[Free Full Text]
6
6. Fiebelkorn, K. R., S. A. Crawford, M. L. McElmeel, and J. H. Jorgensen. 2003. Practical disk diffusion method for detection of inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci. J. Clin. Microbiol. 41:4740-4744.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7
7. Frank, A. L., J. F. Marcinak, P. D. Mangat, J. T. Tjhio, S. Kelkar, P. C. Schreckenberger, and J. P. Quinn. 2002. Clindamycin treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in children. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 21:530-534.[CrossRef][Medline]
8
8. Gibbons, S., M. Oluwatuyi, and G. W. Kaatz. 2003. A novel inhibitor of multidrug resistant efflux pumps in Staphylococcus aureus. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 51:13-17.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9
9. Hamilton-Miller, J. M. T., and S. Shah. 2000. Patterns of phenotypic resistance to the macrolide-lincosamide-ketolide-streptogramin group of antibiotics in staphylococci. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 46:941-949.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10
10. Jorgensen, J. H., S. A. Crawford, M. L. McElmeel, and K. R. Fiebelkorn. 2004. Detection of inducible clindamycin resistance of staphylococci in conjunction with performance of automated broth susceptibility testing. J. Clin. Microbiol. 42:1800-1802.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11
11. Markham, P. N., E. Westhaus, K. Klyachko, M. E. Johnson, and A. A. Neyfakh. 1999. Multiple novel inhibitors of the NorA multidrug transporter of Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43:2404-2408.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12
12. Matsuoka, M., L. Janosi, K. Endou, and Y. Nakajima. 1999. Cloning and sequence of inducible and constitutive macrolide resistance genes in Staphylococcus aureus that correspond to an ABC transporter. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 181:91-100.[CrossRef][Medline]
13
13. NCCLS. 2003. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. Approved standard M7-A6. NCCLS, Wayne, Pa.
14
14. NCCLS. 2003. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests. Approved standard M2-A8. NCCLS, Wayne, Pa.
15
15. Rao, G. G. 2000. Should clindamycin be used in treatment of patients with infections caused by erythromycin-resistant staphylococci? J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 45:715.[Free Full Text]
16
16. 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]
17
17. Siberry, G. K., T. Tekle, K. Carroll, and J. Dick. 2003. Failure of clindamycin treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus expressing inducible clindamycin resistance in vitro. Clin. Infect. Dis. 37:1257-1260.[CrossRef][Medline]
18
18. Weisblum, B. 1995. Erythromycin resistance by ribosome modification. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 39:577-585.[Medline]

---

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, July 2005, p. 3059-3061, Vol. 49, No. 7
0066-4804/05/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/AAC.49.7.3059-3061.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Yoon, E.-J., Kwon, A.-R., Min, Y.-H., Choi, E.-C. (2008). Foggy D-shaped zone of inhibition in Staphylococcus aureus owing to a dual character of both inducible and constitutive resistance to macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B. J Antimicrob Chemother 61: 533-540 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Depardieu, F., Podglajen, I., Leclercq, R., Collatz, E., Courvalin, P. (2007). Modes and Modulations of Antibiotic Resistance Gene Expression. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 20: 79-114 [Abstract] [Full Text]  

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Davis, K. A. Articles by Jorgensen, J. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Davis, K. A. Articles by Jorgensen, J. H.