Objectives: To evaluate the in vitro susceptibility of ESBL-producing Enterobacterales isolates to ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T), a combination of tazobactam (a ß-lactamase inhibitor) and a new antipseudomonal cephalosporin.
Methods: From 2016 to 2019, susceptibilities of 10,545 Enterobacterales isolated from intra-abdominal, urinary tract, respiratory tract and bloodstream infections to C/T and 11 other antimicrobial agents were analyzed. Non-ESBL-producing isolates were included for comparative analysis to provide a comprehensive susceptibility profile.
Results: Among 10,545 isolated Enterobacterales, 54.6% were ESBL producers. The ESBL-positive rates for E. coli (984/10,545, 47.3%) and K. pneumoniae (3,606/10,545, 34.2%) were 59.8% and 51.1%, respectively. The susceptibility rate to C/T for all Enterobacterales was 79.5%. For E. coli and K. pneumoniae, the C/T susceptibilities were 89.3% and 68.0%, respectively. For non-ESBL-producing Enterobacterales, susceptibility to C/T was 99.5%. The susceptibility of non-carbapenem-resistant (CR) ESBL-producing Enterobacterales to C/T was 81.0%. The isolation rates of ESBL-positive and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), CR-E. coli, and CR-K. pneumoniae were 14.3%, 5.6% and 26.8%, respectively. The susceptibility of ESBL-positive CREs to C/T was < 20% for most antimicrobials except amikacin (50.4%). The susceptibility of ESBL-positive CR-E. coli to C/T was 28.2. For ESBL-producing CR-K. pneumoniae, susceptibility to most antimicrobials was < 10%, except for amikacin (37.4%).
Conclusions: The present research underscores the viability of C/T as an alternative to carbapenems for the treatment of ESBL-producing, carbapenem susceptible Enterobacterales. However, the susceptibilities of ESBL-positive CRE to C/T and other studied antimicrobials were consistently below 20%, emphasizing for new innovative treatment strategies.
Objective: Molecular determinants of β-lactam resistance are poorly explored for most Nocardia species, such as Nocardia brasiliensis. In this study, we characterised resistance mediated by two β-lactamases in the reference strain N. brasiliensis HUJEG-1 and extended our analysis to nine N. brasiliensis clinical strains.
Methods: The susceptibility of N. brasiliensis HUJEG-1 was determined by measuring the MIC via microdilution for five β-lactam antibiotics that were or were not associated with β-lactamase inhibitors (clavulanate and avibactam, 4 µg/mL). Two putative class A β-lactamase-encoding genes (blaBRA-1 and blaBRS-1) were identified in the HUJEG-1 genome. The kinetic parameters of purified BRA-1 and BRS-1 were determined by spectrophotometry. Measurement of β-lactam resistance was then extended to nine clinical strains. These phenotypic data were compared with the genomic diversity of whole genomes (next-generation sequencing).
Results: N. brasiliensis HUJEG-1 was resistant to amoxicillin, cefuroxime, and cefotaxime, but susceptible to their combination with clavulanate or avibactam. This strain was resistant to imipenem (with or without inhibitors) and susceptible to meropenem. BRA-1 showed high catalytic efficiencies against penams (penicillin, ampicillin) and cephems (cephaloridine, cephalothin, and cefamandole), but not against penems (imipenem, meropenem), suggesting that imipenem resistance was mediated by another mechanism. The hydrolytic activity of BRS-1 was 100-1000-fold lower than that of BRA-1 for all β-lactams tested, suggesting that BRS-1 has a minor contribution to β-lactam resistance. Analysis of the nine clinical strains showed variations in susceptibility to cefotaxime, as well as diversity in genetic backgrounds and BRA-1 sequences.
Conclusions: N. brasiliensis HUJEG-1 resistance to penams and cephems is mainly due to the class A β-lactamase BRA-1.