» Articles » PMID: 30445773

Proteomic Signatures of Stressed with Metronidazole, Vancomycin, or Fidaxomicin

Overview
Journal Cells
Publisher MDPI
Date 2018 Nov 18
PMID 30445773
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The anaerobic pathogen is of growing significance for the health care system due to its increasing incidence and mortality. As infection is both supported and treated by antibiotics, a deeper knowledge on how antimicrobial agents affect the physiology of this important pathogen may help to understand and prevent the development and spreading of antibiotic resistant strains. As the proteomic response of a cell to stress aims at counteracting the harmful effects of this stress, it can be expected that the pattern of a pathogen's responses to antibiotic treatment will be dependent on the antibiotic mechanism of action. Hence, every antibiotic treatment is expected to result in a specific proteomic signature characterizing its mode of action. In the study presented here, the proteomic response of 630∆ to vancomycin, metronidazole, and fidaxomicin stress was investigated on the level of protein abundance and protein synthesis based on 2D PAGE. The quantification of 425 proteins of allowed the deduction of proteomic signatures specific for each drug treatment. Indeed, these proteomic signatures indicate very specific cellular responses to each antibiotic with only little overlap of the responses. Whereas signature proteins for vancomycin stress fulfil various cellular functions, the proteomic signature of metronidazole stress is characterized by alterations of proteins involved in protein biosynthesis and protein degradation as well as in DNA replication, recombination, and repair. In contrast, proteins differentially expressed after fidaxomicin treatment can be assigned to amino acid biosynthesis, transcription, cell motility, and the cell envelope functions. Notably, the data provided by this study hint also at so far unknown antibiotic detoxification mechanisms.

Citing Articles

Butyrate enhances sporulation .

Baldassare M, Bhattacharjee D, Coles J, Nelson S, McCollum C, Seekatz A J Bacteriol. 2023; 205(9):e0013823.

PMID: 37655912 PMC: 10521354. DOI: 10.1128/jb.00138-23.


Evaluation of cellular response to toxin-A: a network analysis.

Arjmand B, Jahani Sherafat S, Rezaei Tavirani M, Hamzeloo Moghadam M, Khodadoost M Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench. 2023; 15(4):421-425.

PMID: 36762215 PMC: 9876764. DOI: 10.22037/ghfbb.v15i4.2634.


Clostridioides difficile Modifies its Aromatic Compound Metabolism in Response to Amidochelocardin-Induced Membrane Stress.

Brauer M, Hotop S, Wurster M, Herrmann J, Miethke M, Schluter R mSphere. 2022; 7(5):e0030222.

PMID: 35993700 PMC: 9599328. DOI: 10.1128/msphere.00302-22.


Myxopyronin B inhibits growth of a Fidaxomicin-resistant Clostridioides difficile isolate and interferes with toxin synthesis.

Brauer M, Herrmann J, Zuhlke D, Muller R, Riedel K, Sievers S Gut Pathog. 2022; 14(1):4.

PMID: 34991700 PMC: 8739712. DOI: 10.1186/s13099-021-00475-9.


Ebselen Not Only Inhibits Clostridioides difficile Toxins but Displays Redox-Associated Cellular Killing.

Marreddy R, Olaitan A, May J, Dong M, Hurdle J Microbiol Spectr. 2021; 9(2):e0044821.

PMID: 34468187 PMC: 8557875. DOI: 10.1128/Spectrum.00448-21.


References
1.
Goldstein E, Citron D, Tyrrell K, Warren Y . Bactericidal activity of telavancin, vancomycin and metronidazole against Clostridium difficile. Anaerobe. 2010; 16(3):220-2. DOI: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2009.12.002. View

2.
Pelaez T, Alcala L, Alonso R, Rodriguez-Creixems M, Garcia-Lechuz J, Bouza E . Reassessment of Clostridium difficile susceptibility to metronidazole and vancomycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002; 46(6):1647-50. PMC: 127235. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.46.6.1647-1650.2002. View

3.
Bandow J, Brotz H, Leichert L, Labischinski H, Hecker M . Proteomic approach to understanding antibiotic action. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003; 47(3):948-55. PMC: 149304. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.3.948-955.2003. View

4.
Surawicz C, Brandt L, Binion D, Ananthakrishnan A, Curry S, Gilligan P . Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of Clostridium difficile infections. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013; 108(4):478-98. DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2013.4. View

5.
Cornely O, Nathwani D, Ivanescu C, Odufowora-Sita O, Retsa P, O Odeyemi I . Clinical efficacy of fidaxomicin compared with vancomycin and metronidazole in Clostridium difficile infections: a meta-analysis and indirect treatment comparison. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014; 69(11):2892-900. DOI: 10.1093/jac/dku261. View