Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Mechanisms of Resistance

Clarithromycin Resistance Mechanisms of Epidemic β-Lactamase-Nonproducing Ampicillin-Resistant Haemophilus influenzae Strains in Japan

Shoji Seyama, Takeaki Wajima, Hidemasa Nakaminami, Norihisa Noguchi
Shoji Seyama
Department of Microbiology, School of Pharmacy, Tokyo University of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Takeaki Wajima
Department of Microbiology, School of Pharmacy, Tokyo University of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hidemasa Nakaminami
Department of Microbiology, School of Pharmacy, Tokyo University of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Norihisa Noguchi
Department of Microbiology, School of Pharmacy, Tokyo University of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00163-16
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to clarify the clarithromycin resistance mechanisms of β-lactamase-nonproducing ampicillin-resistant Haemophilus influenzae strains. In all clarithromycin-resistant strains, the transcript level of acrB was significantly elevated, and these strains had a frameshift mutation in acrR. Introduction of the acrR mutation into H. influenzae Rd generated a clarithromycin-resistant transformant with the same MIC as the donor strain. Our results indicate that the acrR mutation confers clarithromycin resistance by the increasing the transcription of acrB.

TEXT

Haemophilus influenzae can cause respiratory tract infections, otolaryngology disease, and meningitis (1). β-Lactams have been used as the first-line treatment agents for H. influenzae infections. However, β-lactamase-producing ampicillin-resistant (BLPAR) H. influenzae and β-lactamase-nonproducing ampicillin-resistant (BLNAR) H. influenzae do occur. These β-lactam-resistant strains represent serious clinical problems (2–4).

For the treatment of BLNAR H. influenzae infections, macrolides, including azithromycin (AZM) and clarithromycin (CLR), and fluoroquinolones can be used as alternative agents of β-lactams. However, in general, fluoroquinolones cannot be used for children because of the risk of fluoroquinolone-associated cartilage lesions (5). Therefore, macrolides are the most important options for treatment. Furthermore, macrolides are frequently used in the empirical treatment of bronchopulmonary infections without the identification of causative pathogens because of wide antibacterial activity against Streptococcus pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae. However, many pathogens have become macrolide resistant (6–8). We reported previously that clarithromycin susceptibility has decreased among clinically isolated BLNAR H. influenzae, suggesting the occurrence of multidrug-resistant BLNAR H. influenzae (9).

There are three known macrolide resistance mechanisms in H. influenzae. One mechanism is the acquisition of the resistance genes mefA and ermB that encode a drug efflux pump and 23S rRNA methylase, respectively (10). Another mechanism is the decreased affinity for macrolides achieved by amino acid substitutions on ribosomal proteins L4 and L22 (10). The third mechanism is the overexpression of chromosomal multidrug efflux pumps, such as YieO, YdeA, EmrB, NorM, and AcrB (11–13).

Information regarding the resistance mechanisms might help prevent the spread of clarithromycin-resistant and multidrug-resistant BLNAR H. influenzae. In this study, we clarified the macrolide resistance mechanisms among clinically isolated clarithromycin-resistant BLNAR H. influenzae strains.

We collected BLNAR H. influenzae isolates from patients with respiratory infections at the Tokyo Medical University Hachioji Medical Center between 2010 and 2012 (9). Among them, all clarithromycin-resistant BLNAR H. influenzae isolates (n = 7; clarithromycin MIC, ≥32 μg/ml) were used in this study. Clarithromycin-susceptible strains (clarithromycin MIC, ≤8 μg/ml) isolated during the same period were extracted at random for comparison with the resistant strains. These isolates were genetically identified as H. influenzae in a previous study (9). The definitions of clarithromycin and ampicillin resistance were based on the breakpoints by CLSI (14). H. influenzae was cultured on chocolate agar and in supplemented brain heart infusion (sBHI) broth, which contains NAD (15 μg/ml) and hemin (15 μg/ml) added to BHI broth (Oxoid, Hampshire, United Kingdom), at 37°C for 24 h in 5% CO2 (15).

The detection of mefA and ermB was performed using the PCR method described by Noguchi et al. (16). mefA and ermB possessing S. pneumoniae clinical isolates were used as a positive control. The detection of mutations in L4 and L22 was performed by PCR and DNA sequencing methods found in previous reports, with minor modifications (17, 18).

Antimicrobial susceptibilities were measured using the broth dilution method, according to the CLSI and the Japanese Society of Chemotherapy (19, 20). The tested antimicrobial agents included azithromycin (AZM) (LKT Laboratories, St. Paul, MN), clarithromycin (CLR) (Tokyo Chemical Industry Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), minocycline (MIN) (Wako, Osaka, Japan), norfloxacin (NOR) (Wako), and ethidium bromide (EB) (Wako). Reserpine (Sigma-Aldrich Japan, Tokyo, Japan), phenylalanine-arginine β-naphthylamide (PAβN) (Sigma-Aldrich Japan), and carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP) (Wako) were used as efflux pump inhibitors (21). The MICs of clarithromycin and azithromycin were measured with or without efflux pump inhibitors. The concentrations of efflux pump inhibitors were 5 μg/ml reserpine, 25 or 50 μg/ml PAβN, and 0.75 or 1.5 μg/ml CCCP.

The transcription levels of chromosomal multidrug efflux pump genes (yieO, ydeA, emrB, norM. and acrB) were evaluated by semiquantitative reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) using specific primers (see Table S1 in the supplemental material). The PCR products were electrophoresed, and the gel images were analyzed by ImageJ (http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/). gyrB was used as an internal control. These experiments were performed at least three times on independent occasions.

The acr operon of clarithromycin-resistant strains was amplified by PCR and sequenced. The primers used in this experiment are listed in Table S1 in the supplemental material. Analyses of the nucleotide sequences were performed using ATGC software (Genetyx, Tokyo, Japan).

A transformation experiment was performed by electroporation. Competent cells were prepared using the method described by Ubukata et al. (1). Transformants were selected by spreading on chocolate agar containing clarithromycin at 16 μg/ml.

To identify clarithromycin resistance mechanisms, the macrolide resistance genes mefA and ermB and amino acid substitutions in L4 and L22 were examined. mefA and ermB and the amino acid substitutions in L4 and L22 were not detected (data not shown).

We then investigated whether efflux pumps contributed to macrolide resistance (Table 1). In the presence of CCCP, an efflux pump inhibitor, the MICs of clarithromycin and azithromycin of clarithromycin-resistant strains decreased to the same level as those of clarithromycin-susceptible strains in a dose-dependent manner (Table 1). With the addition of another efflux pump inhibitor, PAβN, the MICs slightly decreased (Table 1). No decrease in the MICs of the clarithromycin-susceptible strains 130-2011 and ATCC 49247 were observed following the addition of CCCP and PAβN. These results suggested that macrolide resistance involves efflux pumps. The other efflux pump inhibitor, reserpine, did not affect resistance.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

MICs of CAM-resistant BLNAR and CAM-susceptible BLNAR H. influenzae

We hypothesized that clarithromycin resistance was conferred by the overexpression of chromosomal multidrug efflux pumps in H. influenzae. To test this hypothesis, the transcription levels of chromosomal multidrug efflux pump genes (yieO, ydeA, emrB, norM, and acrB) in H. influenzae were analyzed by RT-PCR. We compared those transcription levels to the level of gyrB, and we found that the transcription of acrB in the clarithromycin-resistant strain 42-2012 was significantly higher than that in the clarithromycin-susceptible strains 130-2011 and ATCC 49247 (P < 0.05) (Fig. 1). No differences in the transcription levels of other efflux pump genes were observed in any strains (data not shown). These results suggested that the overexpression of acrB contributes to clarithromycin resistance.

FIG 1
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 1

Transcription level of the acrB gene. The transcription levels of acrB, which encodes a chromosomal multidrug efflux pump in H. influenzae, were analyzed by semiquantitative reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR). The relative intensity was calculated in comparison with the transcription level of gyrB. 42-2012, clarithromycin-resistant strain; 130-2011, clarithromycin-susceptible strain; ATCC 49247, clarithromycin-susceptible control strain; Rd, H. influenzae Rd; Rd42acr, Rd strain transformed with the acrR gene from strain 42-2012. *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01. Results are shown as the means ± standard deviations.

To explore the reason for the increased acrB transcription, the acr operons of clarithromycin-resistant strains were sequenced. The acr operon includes acrR (564 bp), acrA (1,149 bp), and acrB (3,099 bp) (12, 22).

The sequence of acrR to acrB (4,891 bp) in the clarithromycin-resistant strain 42-2012 was compared with the sequence of H. influenzae Rd (GenBank accession no. NC_000907). The clarithromycin-resistant strain 42-2012 had a deletion of 141 nucleotides in acrR (accession no. LC126887). This mutation caused a frameshift and generated a stop codon at amino acid 105. These data suggest that the disruption of AcrR by this mutation is related to the overexpression of acrB. The acrR genes of the other clarithromycin-resistant clinical isolates were also sequenced. All clarithromycin-resistant strains had insertions or deletions in acrR that disrupted the function of AcrR (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Identified amino acid substitutions in the acrR gene of H. influenzae used in this study

To confirm that a mutation of acrR conferred clarithromycin resistance, the acrR region of clarithromycin-resistant strain 42-2012 was amplified by PCR and introduced into H. influenzae Rd. Consequently, 68 transformants were obtained. The nucleotide sequences of acrR in seven transformants were analyzed, and all tested sequences had the same mutation as the donor strain 42-2012. The MICs of clarithromycin and azithromycin for the transformants were tested, and we found that the MICs had increased to the same level as those of the donor strain 42-2012 (Table 3). The transcription of the acrB gene of these transformants was also increased significantly compared with that of the parent strain Rd (Fig. 1, P < 0.05).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3

MICs of H. influenzae Rd strains transformed with the 42-2012 acr gene

BLNAR H. influenzae spreads rapidly, and the incidence of difficult cases with resistance to select antimicrobials has increased. For the treatment of BLNAR H. influenzae infections, macrolides are important therapeutic medicine. We previously reported that BLNAR H. influenzae strains with reduced susceptibility to clarithromycin were prevalent in a Japanese university hospital (9). In this study, to clarify the macrolide resistance mechanisms of H. influenzae, we analyzed the molecular mechanisms of resistance.

mefA and ermB and amino acid substitutions of L4 and L22 were not found. These results are similar to those of a recent study by Atkinson and colleagues (23). On the other hand, Roberts et al. (10) reported that macrolide resistance genes in H. influenzae were detected. In general, macrolide resistance gene confers high-level resistance to not only clarithromycin but also azithromycin. Our isolates showed resistance to clarithromycin but not to azithromycin, except for one strain, suggesting that these genes were not involved. The MICs of macrolides for clarithromycin-resistant strains decreased in the presence of CCCP and PAβN, and the transcriptional levels of acrB in these strains were significantly higher than those in the clarithromycin-susceptible strains.

Several studies have reported that macrolides can be excreted by chromosomal multiple drug efflux pumps; AcrAB belongs to the resistance-nodulation-division (RND) family of transporters (11, 12). AcrAB is encoded by an operon that contains acrR, acrA, and acrB. The transcription of acrAB is negatively regulated by the repressor AcrR (24). The acrRAB clusters of H. influenzae are homologous to those of Escherichia coli (12). The acrAB gene clusters contributed to reduced susceptibility to macrolides, such as clarithromycin and azithromycin (11, 12, 25).

All clarithromycin-resistant strains had deletions or insertions in acrR that disrupted the function of the AcrR protein. When an acrR mutation was transformed into H. influenzae Rd, the transcription of acrB in all transformants was elevated significantly, and the MICs of clarithromycin and azithromycin increased. When the transformation was performed using donor strain 72-2011, which contained a different acrR mutation site from that in the clarithromycin-resistant strain 42-2012, the same results were obtained (data not shown).

Our results indicate that the dysfunction of AcrR confers macrolide resistance. However, the mutation sites in acrR varied among the strains, suggesting that the acrR region in H. influenzae might be a hot spot where mutations occur easily.

Point mutations in acrR might easily be generated by the selective pressure provided by the frequent use of macrolides.

Nucleotide sequence accession number.Newly reported sequence data related to this article have been deposited (accession no. LC126887).

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 19 January 2016.
    • Returned for modification 14 February 2016.
    • Accepted 29 February 2016.
    • Accepted manuscript posted online 7 March 2016.
  • Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00163-16.

  • Copyright © 2016, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Ubukata K,
    2. Shibasaki Y,
    3. Yamamoto K,
    4. Chiba N,
    5. Hasegawa K,
    6. Takeuchi Y,
    7. Sunakawa K,
    8. Inoue M,
    9. Konno M
    . 2001. Association of amino acid substitutions in penicillin-binding protein 3 with beta-lactam resistance in beta-lactamase-negative ampicillin-resistant Haemophilus influenzae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 45:1693–1699. doi:10.1128/AAC.45.6.1693-1699.2001.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Hasegawa K,
    2. Yamamoto K,
    3. Chiba N,
    4. Kobayashi R,
    5. Nagai K,
    6. Jacobs MR,
    7. Appelbaum PC,
    8. Sunakawa K,
    9. Ubukata K
    . 2003. Diversity of ampicillin-resistance genes in Haemophilus influenzae in Japan and the United States. Microb Drug Resist 9:39–46. doi:10.1089/107662903764736337.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.↵
    1. Kishii K,
    2. Morozumi M,
    3. Hasegawa K,
    4. Ubukata K
    . 2009. Antibiotic susceptibility and resistance gene analysis of Haemophilus Influenzae in clinical tebipenem-pivoxil studies in pediatric patients using PCR method. Jpn J Chemother 57:67–75.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Medeiros AA,
    2. Levesque R,
    3. Jacoby GA
    . 1986. An animal source for the ROB-1 beta-lactamase of Haemophilus influenzae type b. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 29:212–215. doi:10.1128/AAC.29.2.212.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Noel GJ,
    2. Bradley JS,
    3. Kauffman RE,
    4. Duffy CM,
    5. Gerbino PG,
    6. Arguedas A,
    7. Bagchi P,
    8. Balis DA,
    9. Blumer JL
    . 2007. Comparative safety profile of levofloxacin in 2523 children with a focus on four specific musculoskeletal disorders. Pediatr Infect Dis J 26:879–891. doi:10.1097/INF.0b013e3180cbd382.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    1. Diaz MH,
    2. Benitez AJ,
    3. Winchell JM
    . 2015. Investigations of Mycoplasma pneumoniae infections in the United States: trends in molecular typing and macrolide resistance from 2006 to 2013. J Clin Microbiol 53:124–130. doi:10.1128/JCM.02597-14.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Shortridge VD,
    2. Flamm RK,
    3. Ramer N,
    4. Beyer J,
    5. Tanaka SK
    . 1996. Novel mechanism of macrolide resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 26:73–78. doi:10.1016/S0732-8893(96)00183-6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    1. Ozawa D,
    2. Yano H,
    3. Hidaka H,
    4. Kakuta R,
    5. Komatsu M,
    6. Endo S,
    7. Kanamori H,
    8. Kaku M,
    9. Katori Y
    . 2014. Twelve-year survey (2001–2012) of the antimicrobial susceptibility of Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates from otorhinolaryngology clinics in Miyagi Prefecture, Japan. J Infect Chemother 20:702–708. doi:10.1016/j.jiac.2014.07.014.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Wajima T,
    2. Seyama S,
    3. Nakamura Y,
    4. Kashima C,
    5. Nakaminami H,
    6. Ushio M,
    7. Fujii T,
    8. Noguchi N
    . 2016. Prevalence of macrolide-non-susceptible isolates among β-lactamase-negative ampicillin-resistant Haemophilus influenzae in a tertiary care hospital in Japan. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. doi:10.1016/j.jgar.2016.01.014.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. 10.↵
    1. Roberts MC,
    2. Soge OO,
    3. No DB
    . 2011. Characterization of macrolide resistance genes in Haemophilus influenzae isolated from children with cystic fibrosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 66:100–104. doi:10.1093/jac/dkq425.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. 11.↵
    1. Peric M,
    2. Bozdogan B,
    3. Jacobs MR,
    4. Appelbaum PC
    . 2003. Effects of an efflux mechanism and ribosomal mutations on macrolide susceptibility of Haemophilus influenzae clinical isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 47:1017–1022. doi:10.1128/AAC.47.3.1017-1022.2003.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Sánchez L,
    2. Pan W,
    3. Viñas M,
    4. Nikaido H
    . 1997. The acrAB homolog of Haemophilus influenzae codes for a functional multidrug efflux pump. J Bacteriol 179:6855–6857.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Trepod CM,
    2. Mott JE
    . 2004. Identification of the Haemophilus influenzae tolC gene by susceptibility profiles of insertionally inactivated efflux pump mutants. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 48:1416–1418. doi:10.1128/AAC.48.4.1416-1418.2004.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    CLSI. 2010. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 20th informational supplement. CLSI document M100-S20. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
  15. 15.↵
    1. Nye KJ,
    2. Fallon D,
    3. Gee B,
    4. Messer S,
    5. Warren RE,
    6. Andrews N
    . 1999. A comparison of blood agar supplemented with NAD with plain blood agar and chocolated blood agar in the isolation of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae from sputum. Bacterial Methods Evaluation Group. J Med Microbiol 48:1111–1114.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Noguchi N,
    2. Tano J,
    3. Nasu Y,
    4. Koyama M,
    5. Narui K,
    6. Kamishima H,
    7. Saito T,
    8. Tsuyuki K,
    9. Sasatsu M
    . 2007. Antimicrobial susceptibilities and distribution of resistance genes for beta-lactams and macrolides in Streptococcus pneumoniae isolated between 2002 and 2004 in Tokyo. Int J Antimicrob Agents 29:26–33. doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2006.09.004.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Clark C,
    2. Bozdogan B,
    3. Peric M,
    4. Dewasse B,
    5. Jacobs MR,
    6. Appelbaum PC
    . 2002. In vitro selection of resistance in Haemophilus influenzae by amoxicillin-clavulanate, cefpodoxime, cefprozil, azithromycin, and clarithromycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46:2956–2962. doi:10.1128/AAC.46.9.2956-2962.2002.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Noguchi N,
    2. Tamura M,
    3. Narui K,
    4. Wakasugi K,
    5. Sasatsu M
    . 2002. Frequency and genetic characterization of multidrug-resistant mutants of Staphylococcus aureus after selection with individual antiseptics and fluoroquinolones. Biol Pharm Bull 25:1129–1132. doi:10.1248/bpb.25.1129.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. 19.↵
    CLSI. 2010. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically; approved standard, 8th ed. CLSI document M07-A8. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Yamaguchi K,
    2. Hirakata Y,
    3. Kobayashi I,
    4. Ikedo M,
    5. Ohno A
    . 2012. A report from the committee on microbroth dilution antimicrobial susceptibility testing: issues in antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Haemophilus influenzae: a comparison of the Japanese Society of Chemotherapy lysed horse blood and the CLSI HTM broth microdilution methods. J Infect Chemother 18:134–143. doi:10.1007/s10156-011-0277-3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Nakaminami H,
    2. Noguchi N,
    3. Sasatsu M
    . 2010. Fluoroquinolone efflux by the plasmid-mediated multidrug efflux pump QacB variant QacBIII in Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:4107–4111. doi:10.1128/AAC.01065-09.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Fleischmann RD,
    2. Adams MD,
    3. White O,
    4. Clayton RA,
    5. Kirkness EF,
    6. Kerlavage AR,
    7. Bult CJ,
    8. Tomb JF,
    9. Dougherty BA,
    10. Merrick JM,
    11. McKenney K,
    12. Sutton G,
    13. FitzHugh W,
    14. Fields C,
    15. Gocyne JD,
    16. Scott J,
    17. Shirley R,
    18. Liu L-I,
    19. Glodek A,
    20. Kelley JM,
    21. Weidman JF,
    22. Phillips CA,
    23. Spriggs T,
    24. Hedblom E,
    25. Cutton MD,
    26. Utterback TR,
    27. Hanna MC,
    28. Nguyen DT,
    29. Saudek DM,
    30. Brandon RC,
    31. Fine LD,
    32. Fritchman JL,
    33. Fuhrmann JL,
    34. Geoghagen NSM,
    35. Gnehm CL,
    36. McDonald LA,
    37. Small KV,
    38. Fraser CM,
    39. Smith HO,
    40. Venter JC
    . 1995. Whole-genome random sequencing and assembly of Haemophilus influenzae Rd. Science 269:496–512. doi:10.1126/science.7542800.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Atkinson CT,
    2. Kunde DA,
    3. Tristram SG
    . 2015. Acquired macrolide resistance genes in Haemophilus influenzae? J Antimicrob Chemother 70:2234–2236. doi:10.1093/jac/dkv093.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Ma D,
    2. Alberti M,
    3. Lynch C,
    4. Nikaido H,
    5. Hearst JE
    . 1996. The local repressor AcrR plays a modulating role in the regulation of acrAB genes of Escherichia coli by global stress signals. Mol Microbiol 19:101–112. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.1996.357881.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. 25.↵
    1. Kaczmarek FS,
    2. Gootz TD,
    3. Dib-Hajj F,
    4. Shang W,
    5. Hallowell S,
    6. Cronan M
    . 2004. Genetic and molecular characterization of beta-lactamase-negative ampicillin-resistant Haemophilus influenzae with unusually high resistance to ampicillin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 48:1630–1639. doi:10.1128/AAC.48.5.1630-1639.2004.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Clarithromycin Resistance Mechanisms of Epidemic β-Lactamase-Nonproducing Ampicillin-Resistant Haemophilus influenzae Strains in Japan
Shoji Seyama, Takeaki Wajima, Hidemasa Nakaminami, Norihisa Noguchi
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Apr 2016, 60 (5) 3207-3210; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00163-16

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Clarithromycin Resistance Mechanisms of Epidemic β-Lactamase-Nonproducing Ampicillin-Resistant Haemophilus influenzae Strains in Japan
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Clarithromycin Resistance Mechanisms of Epidemic β-Lactamase-Nonproducing Ampicillin-Resistant Haemophilus influenzae Strains in Japan
Shoji Seyama, Takeaki Wajima, Hidemasa Nakaminami, Norihisa Noguchi
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Apr 2016, 60 (5) 3207-3210; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00163-16
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • TEXT
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AAC
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • AAC Podcast
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AACJournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0066-4804; Online ISSN: 1098-6596