Cefiderocol activity is compromised by acquired extended-spectrum oxacillinases in Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Emerging resistance mechanisms to newer β-lactams in Pseudomonas aeruginosa

BACKGROUND

Although the introduction of novel β-lactams and/or combinations with β-lactamase inhibitors over the last decade is helping to mitigate the threat of extensively drug-resistant/difficult-to-treat-resistant (XDR/DTR) Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections, the problem is far from being solved, due to the capacity of this pathogen for developing resistance.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the emerging/evolving resistance mechanisms to the antipseudomonal β-lactams introduced over the last decade.

SOURCES

Sources include literature review of published studies before December 31 2024 analysing P. aeruginosa resistance mechanisms for ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam, cefiderocol, imipenem/relebactam, meropenem/vaborbactam, and/ aztreonam/avibactam.

CONTENT

Among the emerging resistance mechanisms are noteworthy the mutations in the catalytic centres (mostly the Ω-loop) of AmpC, the horizontally acquired OXA-2/OXA-10 enzymes or of the class A carbapenemases (GES/KPC). These mutations typically confer ceftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibacm resistance. They also frequently increase cefiderocol Minimal Inhibitory Concentrations (MICs), and some of them, such as the L320P AmpC mutation, affect cefiderocol specifically. However, most of these mutations confer collateral susceptibility to carbapenems. Efflux pumps are also relevant, given their capacity to extrude both, the β-lactam and their partner β-lactamase inhibitor. Moreover, beyond the classical mutational overexpression of efflux pumps, emerging resistance is driven by the selection of structural mutations leading to modified (enhanced) substrate recognition. Other emerging mechanisms include β-lactam target mutations (particularly Penicillin-binding protein 3 (PBP3)), large genomic deletions, the activation of two-component regulators (such as ParRS or CpxRS) or the mutations in iron transport systems (such as Piu or Pir) involved in cefiderocol resistance.

IMPLICATIONS

A deep understanding of emerging resistance mechanisms, including their conferred cross-resistances and collateral susceptibilities, should be useful for the optimization of treatments of severe XDR/DTR P. aeruginosa infections.

Not all carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains are alike: tailoring antibiotic therapy based on resistance mechanisms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To correlate the resistance mechanisms and the susceptibility to new antibiotics in Pseudomonas aeruginosa .

RECENT FINDINGS

Definition of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa is still debated. Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA) and difficult-to-treat resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (DTR-PA) are used but which of them better correlate with the risk of mortality remains debated. Mechanisms underlying resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa are complex and may be combined, resulting in unpredictable phenotype and cross-resistance. Thus, not all CRPA are alike and tailoring antibiotic therapy on resistance mechanisms is challenging.

SUMMARY

Current guidelines recommend the use of new antipseudomonal agents for CRPA or DTR-PA infections but they don't provide specific information on how tailoring antibiotic therapy on underlying resistance mechanisms. This review may be useful to understand which mechanisms are involved in CRPA and may have practical implications helping clinicians to select an appropriate antibiotic regimen. Several antibiotics are now available for Pseudomonas aeruginosa but their rational use is important to avoid development of future resistance. The knowledge of local epidemiology and most common resistance mechanisms may guide empirical therapy, but targeted antibiotic therapy should be re-evaluated as soon as susceptibility testing profile is available and selected according to Pseudomonas aeruginosa phenotype.

Impact of chromosomally encoded resistance mechanisms and transferable β-lactamases on the activity of cefiderocol and innovative β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations against Pseudomonas aeruginosa

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to compare the stability of the newly developed β-lactams (cefiderocol) and β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations (ceftazidime/avibactam, ceftolozane/tazobactam, aztreonam/avibactam, cefepime/taniborbactam, cefepime/zidebactam, imipenem/relebactam, meropenem/vaborbactam, meropenem/nacubactam and meropenem/xeruborbactam) against the most clinically relevant mechanisms of mutational and transferable β-lactam resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

METHODS

We screened a collection of 61 P. aeruginosa PAO1 derivatives. Eighteen isolates displayed the most relevant mechanisms of mutational resistance to β-lactams. The other 43 constructs expressed transferable β-lactamases from genes cloned in pUCP-24. MICs were determined by reference broth microdilution.

RESULTS

Cefiderocol and imipenem/relebactam exhibited excellent in vitro activity against all of the mutational resistance mechanisms studied. Aztreonam/avibactam, cefepime/taniborbactam, cefepime/zidebactam, meropenem/vaborbactam, meropenem/nacubactam and meropenem/xeruborbactam proved to be more vulnerable to mutational events, especially to overexpression of efflux operons. The agents exhibiting the widest spectrum of activity against transferable β-lactamases were aztreonam/avibactam and cefepime/zidebactam, followed by cefepime/taniborbactam, cefiderocol, meropenem/xeruborbactam and meropenem/nacubactam. However, some MBLs, particularly NDM enzymes, may affect their activity. Combined production of certain enzymes (e.g. NDM-1) with increased MexAB-OprM-mediated efflux and OprD deficiency results in resistance to almost all agents tested, including last options such as aztreonam/avibactam and cefiderocol.

CONCLUSIONS

Cefiderocol and new β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations show promising and complementary in vitro activity against mutational and transferable P. aeruginosa β-lactam resistance. However, the combined effects of efflux pumps, OprD deficiency and efficient β-lactamases could still result in the loss of all therapeutic options. Resistance surveillance, judicious use of new agents and continued drug development efforts are encouraged.

Comparison of Different Methods for Assaying the In Vitro Activity of Cefiderocol against Carbapenem-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Strains: Influence of Bacterial Inoculum

Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections represent a critical public health concern, highlighting the need for the development of effective antibiotics. Cefiderocol demonstrated potent in vitro activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, particularly in strains that are resistant to other drugs. However, concerns regarding the emergence of drug-resistant strains persist. This study, conducted with 109 carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains from the Spanish Hospital (Dr. Balmis, Alicante). The study evaluated susceptibility to cefiderocol in comparison to alternative antibiotics and including their susceptibility to bacterial inoculum, while assessing various testing methods. Our findings revealed high susceptibility to cefiderocol against carbapenem-resistant strains, with only 2 of 109 strains exhibiting resistance. Comparative analysis demonstrated superiority of cefiderocol towards alternative antibiotics. Both the E-test and disk-diffusion methods showed 100% concordance with the microdilution method in classifying strains as susceptible or resistant. However, 4.6% (5/109) of disc zone diameters fell within the technical uncertainty zone, so the E-test technique was found to be more useful in routine clinical practice. Additionally, escalating bacterial inoculum correlated with decreases in vitro activity, so this parameter should be adjusted very carefully in in vivo studies. This study underscores cefiderocol's potential as a therapeutic option for carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. However, the emergence of drug-resistant strains emphasizes the critical need for a wise use of antibiotics and a continuous monitoring of resistance to antibiotics. Based on our in vitro data, further investigation concerning the impact of bacterial inoculum on drug efficacy is warranted in order to detect resistance mechanisms and optimize treatment strategies, thereby mitigating the risk of resistance.

Multidrug-resistant Gram-negative clinical isolates with reduced susceptibility/resistance to cefiderocol: which are the best present and future therapeutic alternatives?

PURPOSE

To evaluate the different present and future therapeutic β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor (BL/BLI) alternatives, namely aztreonam-avibactam, imipenem-relebactam, meropenem-vaborbactam, cefepime-zidebactam, cefepime-taniborbactam, meropenem-nacubactam, and sulbactam-durlobactam against clinical isolates showing reduced susceptibility or resistance to cefiderocol in Enterobacterales, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

METHODS

MIC values of aztreonam, aztreonam-avibactam, cefepime, cefepime-taniborbactam, cefepime-zidebactam, imipenem, imipenem-relebactam, meropenem, meropenem-vaborbactam, meropenem-nacubactam, sulbactam-durlobactam, and cefiderocol combined with a BLI were determined for 67, 9, and 11 clinical Enterobacterales, P. aeruginosa or A. baumannii isolates, respectively, showing MIC values of cefiderocol being ≥1 mg/L. If unavailable, the respective β-lactam breakpoints according to EUCAST were used for BL/BLI combinations.

RESULTS

For Enterobacterales, the susceptibility rates for aztreonam, cefepime, imipenem, and meropenem were 7.5%, 0%, 10.4%, and 10.4%, respectively, while they were much higher for cefepime-zidebactam (91%), cefiderocol-zidebactam (91%), meropenem-nacubactam (71.6%), cefiderocol-nacubactam (74.6%), and cefiderocol-taniborbactam (76.1%), as expected. For P. aeruginosa isolates, the higher susceptibility rates were observed for imipenem-relebactam, cefiderocol-zidebactam, and meropenem-vaborbactam (56% for all combinations). For A. baumannii isolates, lower susceptibility rates were observed with commercially or under development BL/BLI combos; however, a high susceptibility rate (70%) was found for sulbactam-durlobactam and when cefiderocol was associated to some BLIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Zidebactam- and nacubactam-containing combinations showed a significant in vitro activity against multidrug-resistant Enterobacterales clinical isolates with reduced susceptibility to cefiderocol. On the other hand, imipenem-relebactam and meropenem-vaborbactam showed the highest susceptibility rates against P. aeruginosa isolates. Finally, sulbactam-durlobactam and cefiderocol combined with a BLI were the only effective options against A. baumannii tested isolates.

Extreme resistance to the novel siderophore-cephalosporin cefiderocol in an extensively drug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae strain causing fatal pneumonia with sepsis: genomic analysis and synergistic combinations for resistance reversal

Cefiderocol (CFDC) is the first-in-class siderophore-cephalosporin. Klebsiella pneumoniae strain that is extremely resistant to CFDC (MIC: 256 µg/ml) was isolated for the first time in the United Arab Emirates from a patient with pneumonia and sepsis. It belonged to sequence-type 14 (ST14), with a novel core genome ST. Resistance was driven by the co-expression of β-lactamases (blaNDM-1, blaOXA-232 and blaCTX-M-15) and a mutation in catecholate-siderophore receptor, utilized by CFDC to enter the bacterial cell. Synergistic combinations (β-lactamase inhibitors, aztreonam plus CFDC) re-sensitized the bacteria to CFDC. Although CFDC resistance is multifactorial, the combination with β-lactamase inhibitors represents a promising approach in resistance reversal for fighting superbugs.