In Vitro Susceptibility of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Isolates from Skin and Soft Tissue Infections to Vancomycin, Daptomycin, Linezolid and Tedizolid

Overview

Journal Braz J Infect Dis

Specialty Infectious Diseases

Date 2017 Apr 23

PMID 28432878

Citations 5

Authors

Johanna Marcela Vanegas Munera

Ana Maria Ocampo Rios

Daniela Montoya Urrego

Judy Natalia Jimenez Quiceno

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Treatment of multidrug-resistant Gram-positive infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus remains as a clinical challenge due to emergence of new resistance mechanisms. Tedizolid is a next-generation oxazolidinone, recently approved for skin and soft tissues infections. We conducted a study to determine in vitro susceptibility to vancomycin, daptomycin, linezolid and tedizolid in MRSA clinical isolates from adult patients with skin and soft tissue infections.

Material And Methods: Methicillin-resistant S. aureus isolates were collected in three tertiary-care hospitals of Medellin, Colombia, from February 2008 to June 2010 as part of a previous study. Clinical characteristics were assessed by medical records and MIC values were determined by Epsilometer test. Genotypic analysis included spa typing, MLST, and SCCmec typing.

Results: A total of 150 MRSA isolates were evaluated and tedizolid MIC values obtained showed higher in vitro activity than other antimicrobials, with MIC values ranging from 0.13μg/mL to 0.75μg/mL and lower values of MIC and MIC (0.38μg/mL and 0.5μg/mL) In contrast, vancomycin and linezolid had higher MIC values, which ranged from 0.5μg/mL to 2.0μg/mL and from 0.38μg/mL to 4.0μg/mL, respectively. Tedizolid MICs were 2- to 5-fold lower than those of linezolid. Clinical characteristics showed high previous antimicrobial use and hospitalization history. The majority of the strains belong to the CC8 harboring the SCCmec IVc and were associated with the spa t1610 (29.33%, n=44).

Conclusion: In vitro effectiveness of tedizolid was superior for isolates from skin and soft tissue infections in comparison with the other antibiotics evaluated. The above added to its less toxicity, good bioavailability, daily dose and unnecessity of dosage adjustment, make tedizolid in a promising alternative for the treatment of infections caused by MRSA.

Citing Articles

Antibacterial activity of recently approved antibiotics against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Liu F, Rajabi S, Shi C, Afifirad G, Omidi N, Kouhsari E Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2022; 21(1):37.

PMID: 35978400 PMC: 9382732. DOI: 10.1186/s12941-022-00529-z.

Interplay between ESKAPE Pathogens and Immunity in Skin Infections: An Overview of the Major Determinants of Virulence and Antibiotic Resistance.

de Macedo G, Costa G, Oliveira E, Damasceno G, Mendonca J, Dos Santos Silva L Pathogens. 2021; 10(2).

PMID: 33540588 PMC: 7912840. DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10020148.

Tedizolid Versus Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Lan S, Lin W, Chang S, Lu L, Chao C, Lai C Antibiotics (Basel). 2019; 8(3).

PMID: 31487837 PMC: 6784229. DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics8030137.

Tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy.

Bassetti M, Castaldo N, Carnelutti A, Peghin M, Giacobbe D Core Evid. 2019; 14:31-40.

PMID: 31308835 PMC: 6615724. DOI: 10.2147/CE.S187499.

Distribution of the Most Prevalent Types among Clinical Isolates of Methicillin-Resistant and -Susceptible around the World: A Review.

Asadollahi P, Farahani N, Mirzaii M, Khoramrooz S, van Belkum A, Asadollahi K Front Microbiol. 2018; 9:163.

PMID: 29487578 PMC: 5816571. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00163.

References

Durkin M, Corey G . New developments in the management of severe skin and deep skin structure infections - focus on tedizolid. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2015; 11:857-62. PMC: 4447168. DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S64553. View

Mulvey M, Chui L, Ismail J, Louie L, Murphy C, Chang N . Development of a Canadian standardized protocol for subtyping methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. J Clin Microbiol. 2001; 39(10):3481-5. PMC: 88375. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.39.10.3481-3485.2001. View

Chan L, Basuino L, Dip E, Chambers H . Comparative efficacies of tedizolid phosphate, vancomycin, and daptomycin in a rabbit model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015; 59(6):3252-6. PMC: 4432129. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.04376-14. View

Enright M, Day N, Davies C, Peacock S, Spratt B . Multilocus sequence typing for characterization of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible clones of Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol. 2000; 38(3):1008-15. PMC: 86325. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.38.3.1008-1015.2000. View

Lowy F . Antimicrobial resistance: the example of Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Invest. 2003; 111(9):1265-73. PMC: 154455. DOI: 10.1172/JCI18535. View

Jimenez J, Ocampo A, Vanegas J, Rodriguez E, Mediavilla J, Chen L . A comparison of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus reveals no clinical and epidemiological but molecular differences. Int J Med Microbiol. 2013; 303(2):76-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2012.12.003. View

Chopra I . Antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus aureus: concerns, causes and cures. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2004; 1(1):45-55. DOI: 10.1586/14787210.1.1.45. View

Shorr A, Lodise T, Corey G, De Anda C, Fang E, Das A . Analysis of the phase 3 ESTABLISH trials of tedizolid versus linezolid in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014; 59(2):864-71. PMC: 4335893. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.03688-14. View

Schaadt R, Sweeney D, Shinabarger D, Zurenko G . In vitro activity of TR-700, the active ingredient of the antibacterial prodrug TR-701, a novel oxazolidinone antibacterial agent. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009; 53(8):3236-9. PMC: 2715649. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00228-09. View

10.

Horan T, Andrus M, Dudeck M . CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control. 2008; 36(5):309-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2008.03.002. View

11.

Ruef C . Epidemiology and clinical impact of glycopeptide resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Infection. 2004; 32(6):315-27. DOI: 10.1007/s15010-004-4124-7. View

12.

Rodvold K, McConeghy K . Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus therapy: past, present, and future. Clin Infect Dis. 2013; 58 Suppl 1:S20-7. DOI: 10.1093/cid/cit614. View

13.

Barber K, Smith J, Raut A, Rybak M . Evaluation of tedizolid against Staphylococcus aureus and enterococci with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin, daptomycin or linezolid. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015; 71(1):152-5. DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkv302. View

14.

McClure J, Conly J, Lau V, Elsayed S, Louie T, Hutchins W . Novel multiplex PCR assay for detection of the staphylococcal virulence marker Panton-Valentine leukocidin genes and simultaneous discrimination of methicillin-susceptible from -resistant staphylococci. J Clin Microbiol. 2006; 44(3):1141-4. PMC: 1393128. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.44.3.1141-1144.2006. View

15.

Zhanel G, Love R, Adam H, Golden A, Zelenitsky S, Schweizer F . Tedizolid: a novel oxazolidinone with potent activity against multidrug-resistant gram-positive pathogens. Drugs. 2015; 75(3):253-70. DOI: 10.1007/s40265-015-0352-7. View

16.

Silva-Del Toro S, Greenwood-Quaintance K, Patel R . In vitro activity of tedizolid against linezolid-resistant staphylococci and enterococci. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016; 85(1):102-4. PMC: 8067670. DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2016.02.008. View

17.

Aires de Sousa M, de Lencastre H . Bridges from hospitals to the laboratory: genetic portraits of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clones. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2004; 40(2):101-11. DOI: 10.1016/S0928-8244(03)00370-5. View

18.

Moise P, North D, Steenbergen J, Sakoulas G . Susceptibility relationship between vancomycin and daptomycin in Staphylococcus aureus: facts and assumptions. Lancet Infect Dis. 2009; 9(10):617-24. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(09)70200-2. View

19.

Yum J, Choi S, Yong D, Chong Y, Im W, Rhee D . Comparative in vitro activities of torezolid (DA-7157) against clinical isolates of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria in South Korea. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010; 54(12):5381-6. PMC: 2981271. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00728-10. View

20.

Mehrotra M, Wang G, Johnson W . Multiplex PCR for detection of genes for Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxins, exfoliative toxins, toxic shock syndrome toxin 1, and methicillin resistance. J Clin Microbiol. 2000; 38(3):1032-5. PMC: 86330. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.38.3.1032-1035.2000. View