Possibility of application of the disk diffusion method for studying the sensitivity of coagulase-negative staphylococcus to ceftaroline

Abstract

Ceftaroline is a modern broad-spectrum antibiotic (generation V of cephalosporin), an active metabolite of ceftaroline fosamil. The bactericidal effect of the drug is due to its high affinity of penicillin-binding protein PSP2a (mecA gene), which is responsible for the resistance of staphylococcus strains to methicillin. To determine the antibiotic sensitivity of microorganisms in the bacteriological laboratories of the Russian Federation, the disk diffusion method is widely used, which determines the sensitivity categories as resistant, moderately resistant, or sensitive. However, for several antibacterial drugs, including ceftaroline, criteria for assessing the efficiency only for Staphylococcus aureus are regulated, although coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) are capable to cause various nosocomial infections and are a reservoir of mobile genetic elements determining staphylococci resistance to beta-lactam antibiotics. In cases of testing the sensitivity of CoNS to ceftaroline without established criteria for sensitivity/resistance, doctors cannot interpret the results reliably. In our study, we analyzed the sensitivity of 227 strains of seven CoNS species to ceftaroline. In 93.4% of cases, Staphylococcus epidermidis cultures were identified, and Staphylococcus saprophyticus and Staphylococcus lungdunensis were detected in 3.1% and 2.2% of cases, respectively. Based on the difference in the control points for cefoxitin for S. aureus and S. epidermidis, we proposed options for evaluating the sensitivity/resistance to ceftaroline for CoNS strains. In accordance with these criteria, 88.4% of the cultures selected demonstrated sensitivity to the drug. Moreover, 97.5% of the strains of methicillin-sensitive S. epidermidis were sensitive to ceftaroline, and only 2.5% were moderately resistant. Resistance to ceftaroline was demonstrated by 4.5% of methicillin-resistant S. epidermidis isolates, which in turn were characterized by poly- and pan-resistance. Representatives of the other six species being studied were sensitive to ceftaroline in 100% of cases. The results confirm the high activity of ceftaroline against CoNS. The proposed evaluation criteria interpreted the results more accurately, supplemented the existing antibioticograms, and used ceftaroline in treatment of infections caused by such bacteria.

References

[1] Guidelines for Susceptibility Testing of Microorganisms to Antibacterial Agents. Klinicheskaya mikrobiologiya i antimikrobnaya khimioterapiya. 2004;6(4):306-59. (In Russian)

[2] Методические указания. Определение чувствительности микроорганизмов к антибактериальным препаратам. Клиническая микробиология и антимикробная химиотерапия. 2004;6(4): 306-59.

[3] The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST). Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version 9.0, 2019. Available at: http://www.eucast.org (accessed 15 April 2020).

[4] Vandepitte J., Engbaek K., Rohner P., Piot P., Heuck C.C. Basic Laboratory Procedures in Clinical Bacteriology. 2nd ed. World Health Organization; 2003:109-28.

[5] European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Antimicrobial resistance surveillance in Europe 2015. Annual Report of the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (EARS-Net). Stockholm: ECDC; 2017.

[6] Central Asian and Eastern European surveillance of antimicrobial resistance. Annual report. WHO; 2016. 134 p.

[7] Reshed’ko G.K., Stetsyuk O.U. Features of determining the sensiti¬vity of microorganisms by the disk diffusion method. Klinicheskaya mikrobiologiya i antimikrobnaya khimioterapiya. 2001;3(4):348-54. (In Russian)

[8] Решедько Г.К., Стецюк О.У. Особенности определения чувствительности микроорганизмов диско-диффузионным методом. Клиническая микробиология и антимикробная химиотерапия. 2001;3(4):348-54.

[9] Sader H.S., Farrell D.J., Flamm R.K., Streit J.M., Mendes R.E., Ronald N.J. Antimicrobial activity of ceftaroline and comparator agents when tested against numerous species of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus causing infection in US hospitals. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016;85(1):80-4. Doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2016.01.010..

[10] Sader H.S., Farrell D.J., Flamm R.K., Streit J.M., Mendes R.E., Ronald N.J. Antimicrobial activity of ceftaroline and comparator agents when tested against numerous species of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus causing infection in US hospitals. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016;85(1):80-4. Doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2016.01.010.

[11] Dmitrenko O.A., Ankirskaya A.S., Lyubasovskaya L.A., Kovali¬shena O.V., Popov D.A., et al. Structural polymorphism of genome islands encoding resistance to beta-lactams in coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated at hospitals of the Russian Federation. Antibiotiki i khimioterapiya. 2015;60(7-8):3-10. (In Russian)

[12] Дмитренко О.А., Анкирская А.С., Любасовская Л.А., Ковалишена О.В., Попов Д.А., Гостев В.В. и др. Структурный полиморфизм геномных островов, кодирующих резистентность к бета-лактамным антибиотикам, у коагулазонегативных стафилококков, выделенных в стационарах РФ. Антибиотики и химио¬терапия. 2015;60(7-8):3-10.

[13] Kozlova N.S., Barantsevich N.E., Ivanova L.V. Goik V.G., Schwartz A.P., Mokrova E.V. et al. Susceptibility to antibiotics in nosocomial staphylococci from multidisciplinary hospital. Problemy meditsinskoi mikologii. 2015;17(4):58-62. (In Russian)

[14] Козлова Н.С., Баранцевич Н.Е., Иванова Л.В. Гоик В.Г., Шварц А.П., Мокрова Е.В. и др. Чувствительность к антибактериальным препаратам стафилококков, циркулирующих в многопрофильном стационаре. Проблемы медицинской микологии. 2015;17(4):58-62.

[15] Morrissey I., Leakey А., Northwood J.B. In vitro activity of ceftaroline and comparator antimicrobials against European and Middle East isolates from complicated skin and skin-structure infections collected in 2008–2009. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;40(3):227-34. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2012.05.014.

[16] Morrissey I., Leakey А., Northwood J.B. In vitro activity of ceftaroline and comparator antimicrobials against European and Middle East isolates from complicated skin and skin-structure infections collected in 2008–2009. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012; 40(3):227-34. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2012.05.014.

[17] Granichnaya N.V., Zaitseva E.A., Perelomova O.V. Resistance of coagulase-negative staphylococci recovered from different biomaterials in cardiac patients. Tikhookeanskii meditsinskii zhurnal. 2019; (2):38-42. (In Russian)

[18] Граничная Н.В., Зайцева Е.А., Переломова О.В. Резистентность коагулазонегативных стафилококков, выделенных из различного биоматериала у пациентов кардиохирургического профиля. Тихоокеанский медицинский журнал. 2019;(2):38-42.

[19] Destache C.J., Guervil D.J., Kaye K.S. Сeftaroline fosamil for the treatment of Gram-positive endocarditis: CAPTURE study experience. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019;53(5):644-9. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2019.01.014.

[20] Kozlov R.S., Golub A.V. Ceftaroline – sui generis. Klinicheskaya mikrobiologiya i antimikrobnaya khimioterapiya. 2013;15(2):124-30. (In Russian)

[21] Козлов Р.С., Голуб А.В. Цефтаролин – sui generis. Клиническая микробиология и антимикробная химиотерапия. 2013;15(2): 124-30.

[22] File T.M., Wilcox M.H., Stein G.E. Summary of ceftaroline fosamil clinical trial studies and clinical safety. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55(3): 173-80. Doi: 10.1093/cid/cis559.

[23] File T.M., Wilcox M.H., Stein G.E. Summary of ceftaroline fosamil clinical trial studies and clinical safety. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55(3): 173-80. Doi: 10.1093/cid/cis559..

[24] Brown S.D., Traczewski M.M. In vitro antimicrobial activity of a new cephalosporin, ceftaroline, and determination of quality control ranges for MIC testing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53(3): 1271-4. Doi: 10.1128/AAC.01021-08.

[25] Mushtaq S., Warner M., Ge Y., Kaniga K., Livermore D.M. In vitro activity of ceftaroline (PPI-0903M, T-91825) against bacteria with defined resistance mechanisms and phenotypes. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(2):300-11. Doi: 10.1093/jac/dkm150.

[26] Saravolatz L.D., Stein G.E., Johnson L.B. Ceftaroline: a novel cephalosporin with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52(9):1156-63. Doi: 10.1093/cid/cir147.

[27] Gostev V.V., Popenko L.N., Chernenkaya T.V., Naumenko S.Z., Voroshilova T.M., Khokhlova O.E. et al. Estimation of MRSA susceptibility to oxacillin, cefoxitine, vancomycin and daptomyci. Antibiotiki i khimioterapiya. 2013;58(9-10):13-20. (In Russian)

[28] Гостев В.В., Попенко Л.Н., Черненькая Т.В., Науменко С.З., Ворошилова Т.М., Хохлова О.Е. и др. Оценка чувствительности MRSA к оксациллину, цефокситину, ванкомицину и даптомицину. Антибиотики и химиотерапия. 2013;58(9-10):13-20.

[29] Kozlov R.S., Sukhorukova M.V., Sidorenko S.V., Eidelstein M.V., Skleenova E.Yu., Ivanchik N.V. et al. In vitro Ceftaroline activity against major bacterial pathogens in Russia: results of multicenter study. Klinicheskaya mikrobiologiya i antimikrobnaya khimioterapiya. 2015;17(3):217-26. (In Russian)

[30] Козлов Р.С., Сухорукова М.В., Сидоренко С.В., Эйдельштейн М.В, Склеенова Е.Ю., Иванчик Н.В. и др. Чувствительность основных возбудителей бактериальных инфекций к цефтаролину в РФ. Клиническая микробиология и антимикробная химиотерапия. 2015;17(3):217-26.

[31] Roujansky A., Mathieu M., Camille G., Anne H., Roman M. Multidrug-resistant staphylococcus epidermidis ventriculostomy-related infection successfully treated by intravenous ceftaroline after failure of daptomycin treatment. World Neurosurg. 2020;136:221-5. Doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.013.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Eco-Vector