Published in

Oxford University Press, Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 10(76), p. 2546-2557, 2021

DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkab213

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

In vitro evolution of cefepime/zidebactam (WCK 5222) resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: dynamics, mechanisms, fitness trade-off and impact on in vivo efficacy

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesTo study the dynamics, mechanisms and fitness cost of resistance selection to cefepime, zidebactam and cefepime/zidebactam in Pseudomonas aeruginosa.MethodsWT P. aeruginosa PAO1 and its ΔmutS derivative (PAOMS) were exposed to stepwise increasing concentrations of cefepime, zidebactam and cefepime/zidebactam. Selected mutants were characterized for change in susceptibility profiles, acquired mutations, fitness, virulence and in vivo susceptibility to cefepime/zidebactam. Mutations were identified through WGS. In vitro fitness was assessed by measuring growth in minimal medium and human serum-supplemented Mueller–Hinton broth. Virulence was determined in Caenorhabditis elegans and neutropenic mice lung infection models. In vivo susceptibility to a human-simulated regimen (HSR) of cefepime/zidebactam was studied in neutropenic mice lung infection.ResultsResistance development was lower for the cefepime/zidebactam combination than for the individual components and high-level resistance was only achieved for PAOMS. Cefepime resistance development was associated with mutations leading to the hyperexpression of AmpC or MexXY-OprM, combined with PBP3 mutations and/or large chromosomal deletions involving galU. Zidebactam resistance was mainly associated with mutations in PBP2. On the other hand, resistance to cefepime/zidebactam required multiple mutations in genes encoding MexAB-OprM and its regulators, as well as PBP2 and PBP3. Cumulatively, these mutations inflicted significant fitness cost and cefepime/zidebactam-resistant mutants (MIC = 16–64 mg/L) remained susceptible in vivo to the HSR.ConclusionsDevelopment of cefepime/zidebactam resistance in P. aeruginosa required multiple simultaneous mutations that were associated with a significant impairment of fitness and virulence.