DOCSLIB.ORG

Eravacycline in Vitro Activity Against Clinical Isolates Obtained

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Eravacycline in Vitro Activity Against Clinical Isolates Obtained Eravacycline in vitro activity against clinical isolates obtained from urinary and gastrointestinal sources, including drug-resistant pathogens, from patients in Europe Contact: 1 2 3 3 3 3 Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals Medical Information (TPMI) Matteo Bassetti , Ian Morrissey , Trudy Grossman , Melanie Olesky , Hina Patel , Joyce Sutcliffe Poster P0342 [email protected] 1Santa Maria Misericordia Hospital, Udine, Italy; 2IHMA Europe Sarl, Epalinges, Switzerland; 3Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Watertown, MA, USA 617-715-3600 Introduction Results (cont’d) Gram-negative bacteria are common causes of intra-abdominal infections and urinary Table 1. Summary MIC (mg/L) data from eravacycline against isolates from GI (n = 732) Table 3. Antimicrobial activity of eravacycline and comparator agents against Enterobacteriaceae isolates from GI (n = 403) and GU (n = 422) sources. Table 5. Antimicrobial activity of eravacycline and comparator agents against tract infections, and resistance amongst these pathogens is increasing. Eravacycline and GU (n = 678) infections (where n ≥ 10) Gram-positive isolates from GI (n = 186) and GU (n = 161) sources. a is a novel, fully-synthetic fluorocycline antibiotic of the tetracycline class with broad- GI (n) MIC50/90 MIC range GU (n) MIC50/90 MIC range a Organism/Antimicrobial a MIC (mg/L) %S / %I / %R MIC (mg/L) %S / %I / %R Organism/Antimicrobial MIC (mg/L) %S / %I / %R Organism/Antimicrobial Agent (No. Tested) spectrum activity in development for the treatment of serious infections, including Gram-negatives MIC50 MIC90 Range EUCAST Agent (No. Tested) Agent (No. Tested) b Acinetobacter baumannii (45) 0.5/1 0.03-2 Acinetobacter baumannii (25) 0.25/1 0.03-4 MIC50 MIC90 Range EUCAST MIC50 MIC90 Range EUCAST Enterococcus spp. (149) those caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens. Eravacycline has been evaluated e Amoxicillin/clavulanate 2 >16 0.25-> 16 52.4 / 1.3 / 46.3 Citrobacter freundii (45) 0.25/0.5 0.12-1 Citrobacter freundii (25) 0.25/0.5 0.12-1 Enterobacteriaceae (825) Klebsiella spp. (137) in phase 3 studies for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI) Aztreonam ͠ 0.5 > 16 ͠ 0.5-> 16 78.3 / 3.2 / 18.6 Azithromycin >8 >8 0.25-> 8 -- / -- / -- Citrobacter koseri (10) 0.12/0.25 0.12-0.5 Citrobacter koseri (92) 0.12/0.25 0.12-1 Aztreonam ͠ 0.5 > 16 ͠ 0.5-> 16 75.9 / 1.5 / 22.6 Ceftriaxone >64 >64 1-> 64 -- / -- / -- Cefepime ͠ 0.25 8 ͠ 0.25-> 16 85.8 / 3.8 / 10.4 Cefepime ͠ 0.25 > 16 ͠ 0.25-> 16 78.1 / 3.7 / 18.3 and complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI), including pyelonephritis. The purpose Enterobacter aerogenes (31) 0.5/0.5 0.25-1 Enterobacter aerogenes (52) 0.5/0.5 0.25-2 Daptomycin 4 4 0.25-> 4 -- / -- / -- Ceftazidime ͠ 0.5 > 16 ͠ 0.5-> 16 76.4 / 5.2 / 18.4 Ceftazidime ͠ 0.5 > 16 ͠ 0.5-> 16 78.8 / 3.7 / 17.5 Eravacycline 0.06 0.06 0.015-1 -- / -- / -- of this study was to assess the in vitro activity of eravacycline against recent European Enterobacter cloacae (35) 0.5/2 0.25-4 Enterobacter cloacae (21) 0.5/1 0.5-4 Ceftriaxone ͠ 0.5 > 32 ͠ 0.5-> 32 75.6 / 1.9 / 22.4 Ceftriaxone ͠ 0.5 > 32 ͠ 0.5-> 32 76.6 / 0.7 / 22.6 Levofloxacin >8 >8 0.06-> 8 36.9 / -- / 63.1 Escherichia coli (71) 0.12/0.25 0.06-2 Klebsiella oxytoca (34) 0.25/0.5 0.12-2 Colistin 1 > 4 ͠ 0.12-> 4 62.8 / -- / 37.2 Linezolid 2 2 1-8 99.3 / -- / 0.7 clinical isolates of key pathogens from gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) Colistin 1 1 0.25-> 4 97.8 / -- / 2.2 Minocycline 8 >8 ͠ 0.03-> 8 -- / -- / -- Eravacycline 0.5 2 0.015-16 -- / -- / -- Klebsiella oxytoca (37) 0.25/0.25 0.12-0.5 Morganella morganii (43) 1/2 0.25-8 Eravacycline 0.25 1 0.12-2 -- / -- / -- Penicillin 8 >8 0.5-> 8 -- / -- / -- infections. Gentamicin 1 > 8 ͠ 0.25-> 8 83.8 / 5.5 / 10.8 Klebsiella pneumoniae (63) 0.5/1 0.12-2 Proteus mirabilis (42) 2/2 0.25-4 Gentamicin 0.5 > 8 ͠ 0.25-> 8 89.1 / 0 / 11 Tetracycline 32 >32 0.12->32 -- / -- / -- Imipenem 1 4 ͠ 0.25-> 8 82.4 / 15.9 / 1.7 Tigecycline 0.12 0.25 ͠ 0.015-4 96.6 / 2 / 1.3 Imipenem ͠ 0.25 1 ͠ 0.25-> 8 94.2 / 0.7 / 5.1 Morganella morganii (34) 1/2 0.25-4 Proteus vulgaris (59) 1/1 0.25-2 Levofloxacin ͠ 0.25 > 4 ͠ 0.25-> 4 81.7 / 4.1 / 14.2 Vancomycin 1 >32 0.25-> 32 78.9 / -- / 21.1 Levofloxacin ͠ 0.25 > 4 ͠ 0.25-> 4 81 / 3.7 / 15.3 Proteus mirabilis (35) 1/2 0.5-4 Providencia rettgeri (10) 2/2 0.25-2 Piperacillin/tazobactam 2 32 ͠ 0.5-> 64 83.6 / 3.4 / 13 S. aureus (54) Piperacillin/tazobactam 2 64 ͠ 0.5-> 64 77.4 / 5.8 / 16.8 Amoxicillin/clavulanate 2 >16 0.5-> 16 -- / -- / -- Proteus vulgaris (19) 1/1 0.25-1 Providencia stuartii (25) 1/4 0.5-16 Tetracycline 4 > 8 0.25-> 32 -- / -- / -- Methods Tetracycline 2 > 8 0.5-> 8 -- / -- / -- Azithromycin 1 >8 0.5-> 8 66.7 / 0 / 33.3 Pseudomonas aeruginosa (40) 8/16 1-32 Pseudomonas aeruginosa (13) 8/16 1-16 Tigecycline 1 4 ͠ 0.015-32 70.3 / 18.8 / 10.9 Ceftriaxone 16 >64 1-> 64 -- / -- / -- Tigecycline 0.5 2 0.12-4 89.1 / 8.8 / 2.2 Daptomycin 0.5 1 0.25-1 100 / -- / 0 ! Serratia marcescens (19) 1/4 1-4 Serratia marcescens (15) 1/2 0.5-2 Citrobacter spp.b (172) A total of 732 GI and 678 GU clinical isolates, collected from 2013-2014 from P. mirabilis (77) Eravacycline 0.06 0.25 0.03-1 -- / -- / -- Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (11) 1/1 0.12-2 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (27) 0.5/1 0.12-2 Aztreonam ͠ 0.5 16 ͠ 0.5-> 16 84.3 / 1.7 / 14 amongst 134 European hospitals, were tested. Aztreonam ͠ 0.5 2 ͠ 0.5-> 16 87 / 11.7 / 1.3 Levofloxacin 0.5 >8 0.25-> 8 57.4 / 0 / 42.6 Cefepime ͠ 0.25 1 ͠ 0.25-> 16 95.9 / 1.2 / 2.9 Linezolid 2 2 2-2 100 / -- / 0 Gram-positives Cefepime ͠ 0.25 4 ͠ 0.25-> 16 85.7 / 5.2 / 9.1 ! Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) endpoints were determined by broth Ceftazidime ͠ 0.5 > 16 ͠ 0.5-> 16 83.7 / 2.9 / 13.4 Minocycline 0.12 8 0.06-> 8 85.2 / 0 / 14.8 Enterococcus faecalis (45) 0.06/0.12 0.015-0.5 Enterococcus faecalis (22) 0.06/0.06 0.03-0.12 Ceftriaxone ͠ 0.5 32 ͠ 0.5-> 32 84.9 / 0 / 15.1 Ceftazidime ͠ 0.5 4 ͠ 0.5-> 16 85.7 / 6.5 / 7.8 Penicillin >8 >8 ͠ 0.12-> 8 3.7 / -- / 96.3 microdilution according to CLSI guidelines (1). Ceftriaxone ͠ 0.5 16 ͠ 0.5-> 32 85.7 / 1.3 / 13 Tetracycline 0.5 >32 0.25-> 32 74.1 / 3.7 / 22.2 Enterococcus faecium (58) 0.06/0.06 0.015-1 Enterococcus faecium (24) 0.03/0.06 0.015-0.06 Colistin 0.5 1 ͠ 0.12-4 98.3 / -- / 1.7 Tigecycline 0.12 0.5 0.06-1 94.4 / -- / 5.6 Colistin > 4 > 4 > 4-> 4 0 / -- / 100 ! Quality control testing was performed each day of testing as specified by the Staphylococcus aureus (43) 0.06/0.25 0.03-1 Staphylococcus aureus (11) 0.06/0.12 0.06-1 Eravacycline 0.25 0.5 0.12-1 -- / -- / -- S. haemolyticus (83) Eravacycline 2 2 0.25-4 -- / -- / -- Amoxicillin/clavulanate 2 >16 0.25-> 16 -- / -- / -- Staphylococcus epidermidis (34) 0.12/0.5 0.03-1 Staphylococcus epidermidis (26) 0.25/0.5 0.015-0.5 Gentamicin 0.5 1 ͠ 0.25-> 8 96.5 / 0.6 / 2.9 CLSI using Escherichia coli ATCC 25922, E. coli ATCC 35218, Enterococcus faecalis Imipenem ͠ 0.25 2 ͠ 0.25-> 8 99.4 / 0 / 0.6 Gentamicin 2 > 8 1-> 8 61 / 16.9 / 22.1 Azithromycin >8 >8 0.25-> 8 27.7 / 0 / 72.3 Streptococcus agalactiae (10) 0.03/0.03 0.008-0.03 Staphylococcus haemolyticus (76) 0.12/0.5 0.03-1 Ceftriaxone 64 >64 1-> 64 -- / -- / -- Levofloxacin ͠ 0.25 ͠ 0.25 ͠ 0.25-> 4 97.1 / 1.7 / 1.2 Imipenem 2 8 ͠ 0.25-> 8 53.3 / 45.5 / 1.3 ATCC 29212, Haemophilus influenzae ATCC 49247, H. influenzae ATCC 49766, Streptococcus anginosus (23) 0.008/0.03 ͠ 0.001-0.06 Streptococcus agalactiae (25) 0.015/0.03 0.008-0.06 Daptomycin 0.25 0.5 0.12-1 100 / -- / 0 Piperacillin/tazobactam 2 16 ͠ 0.5-> 64 89.5 / 2.9 / 7.6 Levofloxacin ͠ 0.25 > 4 ͠ 0.25-> 4 75.3 / 9.1 / 15.6 Eravacycline 0.12 0.5 0.03-1 -- / -- / -- Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853, Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 29213, and Tetracycline 1 4 0.5-> 8 -- / -- / -- Piperacillin/tazobactam ͠ 0.5 4 ͠ 0.5-> 64 92.2 / 3.9 / 3.9 Levofloxacin 8 >8 0.12-> 8 30.1 / 0 / 69.9 Streptococcus pneumoniae ATCC 49619.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Uncommon Pathogens Causing Hospital-Acquired Infections in Postoperative Cardiac Surgical Patients
    Published online: 2020-03-06 THIEME Review Article 89 Uncommon Pathogens Causing Hospital-Acquired Infections in Postoperative Cardiac Surgical Patients Manoj Kumar Sahu1 Netto George2 Neha Rastogi2 Chalatti Bipin1 Sarvesh Pal Singh1 1Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, CN Centre, All Address for correspondence Manoj K Sahu, MD, DNB, Department India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, CTVS office, 7th floor, CN 2Infectious Disease, Department of Medicine, All India Institute of Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi-110029, Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India India (e-mail: [email protected]). J Card Crit Care 2020;3:89–96 Abstract Bacterial infections are common causes of sepsis in the intensive care units. However, usually a finite number of Gram-negative bacteria cause sepsis (mostly according to the hospital flora). Some organisms such as Escherichia coli, Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus are relatively common. Others such as Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Chryseobacterium indologenes, Shewanella putrefaciens, Ralstonia pickettii, Providencia, Morganella species, Nocardia, Elizabethkingia, Proteus, and Burkholderia are rare but of immense importance to public health, in view of the high mortality rates these are associated with. Being aware of these organisms, as the cause of hospital-acquired infections, helps in the prevention, Keywords treatment, and control of sepsis in the high-risk cardiac surgical patients including in ► uncommon pathogens heart transplants. Therefore, a basic understanding of when to suspect these organ- ► hospital-acquired isms is important for clinical diagnosis and initiating therapeutic options. This review infection discusses some rarely appearing pathogens in our intensive care unit with respect to ► cardiac surgical the spectrum of infections, and various antibiotics that were effective in managing intensive care unit these bacteria.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 ECCMID | 00656 in Vitro Activities of Ceftazidime-Avibactam and Comparator Agents Against Enterobacterales
    IHMA In Vitro Activities of Ceftazidime-avibactam and Comparator Agents against Enterobacterales and 2122 Palmer Drive 00656 Schaumburg, IL 60173 USA Pseudomonas aeruginosa from Israel Collected Through the ATLAS Global Surveillance Program 2013-2019 www.ihma.com M. Hackel1, M. Wise1, G. Stone2, D. Sahm1 1IHMA, Inc., Schaumburg IL, USA, 2Pfizer Inc., Groton, CT USA Introduction Results Results Summary Avibactam (AVI) is a non-β- Table 1 Distribution of 2,956 Enterobacterales from Israel by species Table 2. In vitro activity of ceftazidime-avibactam and comparators agents Figure 2. Ceftazidime and ceftazidime-avibactam MIC distribution against 29 . Ceftazidime-avibactam exhibited a potent lactam, β-lactamase inhibitor against Enterobacterales and P. aeruginosa from Israel, 2013-2019 non-MBL carbapenem-nonsusceptible (CRE) Enterobacterales from Israel, antimicrobial activity higher than all Organism N % of Total mg/L that can restore the activity of Organism Group (N) %S 2013-2019 comparator agents against all Citrobacter amalonaticus 2 0.1% MIC90 MIC50 Range ceftazidime (CAZ) against Enterobacterales (2956) 20 Enterobacterales from Israel (MIC90, 0.5 Citrobacter braakii 5 0.2% Ceftazidime-avibactam 99.8 0.5 0.12 ≤0.015 - > 128 Ceftazidime Ceftazidime-avibactam organisms that possess Class 18 mg/L; 99.8% susceptible). Citrobacter freundii 96 3.2% Ceftazidime 70.1 64 0.25 ≤0.015 - > 128 A, C, and some Class D β- Cefepime 71.8 > 16 ≤0.12 ≤0.12 - > 16 16 . Susceptibility to ceftazidime-avibactam lactmase enzymes. This study Citrobacter gillenii 1 <0.1% Meropenem 98.8 0.12 ≤0.06 ≤0.06 - > 8 increased to 100% for the Enterobacterales Amikacin 95.4 8 2 ≤0.25 - > 32 14 examined the in vitro activity Citrobacter koseri 123 4.2% when MBL-positive isolates were removed Colistin (n=2544)* 82.2 > 8 0.5 ≤0.06 - > 8 12 of CAZ-AVI and comparators Citrobacter murliniae 1 <0.1% Piperacillin-tazobactam 80.4 32 2 ≤0.12 - > 64 from analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • 경추 척수 손상 환자에서 발생한 Providencia Rettgeri 패혈증 1예 조현정·임승진·천승연·박권오·이상호·박종원·이진서·엄중식 한림대학교 의과대학 내과학교실
    Case Report Infection & DOI: 10.3947/ic.2010.42.6.428 Chemotherapy Infect Chemother 2010;42(6):428-430 경추 척수 손상 환자에서 발생한 Providencia rettgeri 패혈증 1예 조현정·임승진·천승연·박권오·이상호·박종원·이진서·엄중식 한림대학교 의과대학 내과학교실 A Case of Providencia rettgeri Sepsis in a Patient with Hyun-Jung Cho, Seung-Jin Lim, Seung-Yeon Chun, Cervical Cord Injury Kwon-Oh Park, Sang-Ho Lee, Jong-Won Park, Jin- Seo Lee, and Joong-Sik Eom Providencia rettgeri is a member of Enterobacteriacea that is known to cause Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym Univer- urinary tract infection (UTI), septicemia, and wound infections, especially in sity College of Medi cine, Seoul, Korea immunocompromised patients and in those with indwelling urinary catheters. We experienced a case of UTI sepsis by Providencia rettgeri in a patient with spinal cord injury. The patient had only high fever without urinary symptoms or signs after high dose intravenous methylprednisolone. The laboratory results showed leukocytosis (21,900/μL, segmented neutrophils 91.1%) and pyuria. Cefepime was given empirically and it was switched to oral trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole because P. rettgeri was identified from blood and urine culture which was susceptible to TMP-SMX. The patient was improved clinically but P. rettgeri was not eradicated microbiologically. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report on sepsis caused by Providencia rettgeri in Korea. Key Words: Providencia rettgeri, Sepsis, Urinary tract infection Introduction The genus Providencia is a member of the Enterobacteriaceae family which commonly dwells in soil, water, and sewage [1, 2]. Providencia rettgeri is one of five Providencia species that is known to cause various infections, especially the Copyright © 2010 by The Korean Society of Infectious Diseases | Korean urinary tract infection (UTI) [3].
    [Show full text]
  • The LOUISIANA ANTIBIOGRAM Louisiana Antibiotic Resistance 2014
    The LOUISIANA ANTIBIOGRAM Louisiana Antibiotic Trends in Antibiotic Resistance Resistance 2014 in Louisiana 2008 Zahidul Islam MBBS, MPH, Raoult C Ratard MD MPH Contributors to this report: Lauren Kleamenakis MPH, Anup Subedee MD MPH and Raoult Ratard MD MPH. This report covers bacteria causing severe human infections and the antibiotics used to treat those infections. Resistance to other antimicrobials (antivirals, antifungals and anti-parasitic drugs) are not included for lack of systematic reporting and collection of comprehensive data. Contents 1-Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1-Bacterial resistance to antibiotics is a major threat to human health .................................................. 3 1.2-Tracking resistance patterns is a major action in the fight against antibiotic resistance ..................... 3 2-Methods ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1-Active surveillance .............................................................................................................................. 3 2.2-Antibiogram collection ....................................................................................................................... 3 2.3-Analysis ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Antibacterial Efficacy of Eravacycline in Vivo Against Gram-Positive And
    crossmark Antibacterial Efficacy of Eravacycline In Vivo against Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Organisms Marguerite L. Monogue,a Abrar K. Thabit,a,b Yukihiro Hamada,a,c David P. Nicolaua,d Center for Anti-Infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, Connecticut, USAa; Faculty of Pharmacy, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabiab; Aichi Medical University Hospital School of Medicine, Aichi, Japanc; Division of Infectious Diseases, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, Connecticut, USAd Members of the tetracycline class are frequently classified as bacteriostatic. However, recent findings have demonstrated an im- > proved antibacterial killing profile, often achieving 3 log10 bacterial count reduction, when such antibiotics have been given for periods longer than 24 h. We aimed to study this effect with eravacycline, a novel fluorocycline, given in an immunocompetent murine thigh infection model over 72 h against two methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates (eravacycline to 0.25 ␮g/ml). A humanized Downloaded from 0.125 ؍ and 0.25 ␮g/ml) and three Enterobacteriaceae isolates (eravacycline MICs 0.03 ؍ MICs eravacycline regimen, 2.5 mg/kg of body weight given intravenously (i.v.) every 12 h (q12h), demonstrated progressively en- hanced activity over the 72-h study period. A cumulative dose response in which bacterial density was reduced by more than 3 log10 CFU at 72 h was noted over the study period in the two Gram-positive isolates, and eravacycline performed similarly to comparator antibiotics (tigecycline, linezolid, and vancomycin). A cumulative dose response with eravacycline and comparators (tigecycline and meropenem) over the study period was also observed in the Gram-negative isolates, although more variability in bacterial killing was observed for all antibacterial agents.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity and Composition of the Skin, Blood and Gut Microbiome in Rosacea—A Systematic Review of the Literature
    microorganisms Review Diversity and Composition of the Skin, Blood and Gut Microbiome in Rosacea—A Systematic Review of the Literature Klaudia Tutka, Magdalena Zychowska˙ and Adam Reich * Department of Dermatology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Medical College of Rzeszow University, 35-055 Rzeszow, Poland; [email protected] (K.T.); [email protected] (M.Z.)˙ * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-605076722 Received: 30 August 2020; Accepted: 6 November 2020; Published: 8 November 2020 Abstract: Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder of a not fully understood pathophysiology. Microbial factors, although not precisely characterized, are speculated to contribute to the development of the condition. The aim of the current review was to summarize the rosacea-associated alterations in the skin, blood, and gut microbiome, investigated using culture-independent, metagenomic techniques. A systematic review of the PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases was performed, according to PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses) guidelines. Nine out of 185 papers were eligible for analysis. Skin microbiome was investigated in six studies, and in a total number of 115 rosacea patients. Blood microbiome was the subject of one piece of research, conducted in 10 patients with rosacea, and gut microbiome was studied in two papers, and in a total of 23 rosacea subjects. Although all of the studies showed significant alterations in the composition of the skin, blood, or gut microbiome in rosacea, the results were highly inconsistent, or even, in some cases, contradictory. Major limitations included the low number of participants, and different study populations (mainly Asians). Further studies are needed in order to reliably analyze the composition of microbiota in rosacea, and the potential application of microbiome modifications for the treatment of this dermatosis.
    [Show full text]
  • Burkdiff: a Real-Time PCR Allelic Discrimination Assay for Burkholderia Pseudomallei and B
    BurkDiff: A Real-Time PCR Allelic Discrimination Assay for Burkholderia Pseudomallei and B. mallei Jolene R. Bowers1*, David M. Engelthaler1, Jennifer L. Ginther2, Talima Pearson2, Sharon J. Peacock3, Apichai Tuanyok2, David M. Wagner2, Bart J. Currie4, Paul S. Keim1,2 1 Translational Genomics Research Institute, Flagstaff, Arizona, United States of America, 2 Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, United States of America, 3 Mahidol-Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand, 4 Menzies School of Health Research, Darwin, Australia Abstract A real-time PCR assay, BurkDiff, was designed to target a unique conserved region in the B. pseudomallei and B. mallei genomes containing a SNP that differentiates the two species. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed by screening BurkDiff across 469 isolates of B. pseudomallei, 49 isolates of B. mallei, and 390 isolates of clinically relevant non-target species. Concordance of results with traditional speciation methods and no cross-reactivity to non-target species show BurkDiff is a robust, highly validated assay for the detection and differentiation of B. pseudomallei and B. mallei. Citation: Bowers JR, Engelthaler DM, Ginther JL, Pearson T, Peacock SJ, et al. (2010) BurkDiff: A Real-Time PCR Allelic Discrimination Assay for Burkholderia Pseudomallei and B. mallei. PLoS ONE 5(11): e15413. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015413 Editor: Frank R. DeLeo, National Institutes of Health, United States of America Received July 26, 2010; Accepted September 12, 2010; Published November 12, 2010 Copyright: ß 2010 Bowers et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
    [Show full text]
  • In Vitro Activity of Eravacycline and Comparator Antimicrobials Against
    In Vitro Activity of Eravacycline and comparator antimicrobials *Presenting Author: against 143 recent strains of Bacteroides species Diane M. Citron 1209 [email protected] Diane M. Citron, Kerin L. Tyrrell, and Ellie J. C. Goldstein R. M. Alden Research Laboratory, Culver City, CA 90230 Introduction Results Discussion Eravacycline (ERV) is a novel, fully-synthetic fluorocycline antibiotic in Resistance to tetracycline has become common among Bacteroides species and Table 1. In vitro activity (µg/ml) of eravacycline and comparators development for the treatment of serious infections, including those caused by the MIC90 for all of the strains was >32 µg/ml. Eravacycline was four- to eight- multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens. ERV recently completed phase 3 clinical against Bacteroides species. All results for the quality control fold more active than tigecycline against these strains with MIC at 1–4 µg/ml. strains were within acceptable CLSI ranges (4). 90 development for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI) Eravacycline was active against several strains that showed resistance to and is in phase 3 clinical development for complicated urinary tract infections piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem. (cUTI), including pyelonephritis. Organism (no.) / Agent Range MIC MIC 50 90 Resistance to clindamycin was also common and all of these strains were ERV has potent activity against a broad range of Gram-positive, Gram- B. caccae (10) Eravacycline 0.25–4 0.5 2 susceptible to eravacycline. negative and anaerobic pathogens. Like other tetracyclines, ERV inhibits protein Tigecycline 0.25–16 4 16 Metronidazole resistance was not encountered in this group of isolates, although, synthesis by binding to the 30S ribosomal subunit.
    [Show full text]
  • New Drugs – Part Ii Jacqueline King, Pharm.D
    7/7/2016 ANTIBIOTICS AND ANTIFUNGALS 2016 ANNUAL MEETING NEW DRUGS – PART II JACQUELINE KING, PHARM.D. TARA MCNULTY, CPHT, RPHT PHARMACY OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR PROJECT MANAGER UFHEALTH CANCER CENTER WELLCARE HEALTH PLANS, INC [email protected] [email protected] http://s3.amazonaws.com/readers/2010/05/28/bacteria_1.jpg 2016 ANNUAL MEETING DISCLOSURE BACTERIA • Jacqueline King, Pharm.D. • I do not have a vested interest in or affiliation with any corporate organization offering financial support or grant monies for this continuing education activity, or any affiliation with an organization whose philosophy could potentially bias my presentation • Tara, McNulty, CPhT, RPhT • I do not have a vested interest in or affiliation with any corporate organization offering financial support or grant monies for this continuing education activity, or any affiliation with an organization whose philosophy could potentially bias my presentation http://www.dbriers.com/tutorials/wp- content/uploads/2012/12/GramPositiveNegative21.jpg https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/images/1/1b/Gram.jpg 2016 ANNUAL MEETING 2016 ANNUAL MEETING OBJECTIVES ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE • Explore new medications for the treatment of infectious diseases, including HIV • Antibiotic resistance occurs when an antibiotic has lost and Hepatitis C its ability to control or kill bacterial growth • Analyze the impact of the new agents within clinical practice • Causes of antibiotic resistance: Drugs not appropriately prescribed, not completing courses of antibiotics, • Utilize
    [Show full text]
  • Lactamase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) to Eravacycline
    The Journal of Antibiotics (2016) 69, 600–604 & 2016 Japan Antibiotics Research Association All rights reserved 0021-8820/16 www.nature.com/ja ORIGINAL ARTICLE In vitro susceptibility of β-lactamase-producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) to eravacycline Yunliang Zhang, Xiaoyan Lin and Karen Bush Eravacycline is a novel, fully synthetic fluorocycline antibiotic of the tetracycline class being developed for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections. Eravacycline has activity against many key Gram-negative pathogens, including Enterobacteriaceae resistant to carbapenems, cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones and β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations, including strains that are multidrug-resistant. Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) isolates from 2010 to 2013 (n = 110) were characterized for carbapenemase genes by PCR and sequencing. MICs for eravacycline, tetracycline, tigecycline, amikacin, imipenem, ceftazidime, cefotaxime and levofloxacin were determined in broth microdilution assays. All isolates produced at least one carbapenemase, most frequently KPC-3. Nine isolates produced both a KPC serine carbapenemase and a metallo-β-lactamase, NDM-1 (n = 1) or VIM-1 (n = 8). The 110 isolates were highly resistant to all the β-lactams tested and to levofloxacin, and had MIC50/MIC90 values in the intermediate − 1 − 1 range for tetracycline and amikacin. MIC50/MIC90 values for eravacycline were 1/2 μgml compared with 2/2 μgml for tigecycline. Eravacycline MICs were often twofold lower than for tigecycline, with 64% of the eravacycline MICs o2 μgml− 1 as compared with o4% of tigecycline MICs. Overall, eravacycline demonstrated the lowest cumulative MICs against this panel of recent CRE and may have the potential to treat infections caused by CRE.
    [Show full text]
  • Antibiotics Currently in Clinical Development
    A data table from Feb 2018 Antibiotics Currently in Global Clinical Development Note: This data visualization was updated in December 2017 with new data. As of September 2017, approximately 48 new antibiotics1 with the potential to treat serious bacterial infections are in clinical development. The success rate for clinical drug development is low; historical data show that, generally, only 1 in 5 infectious disease products that enter human testing (phase 1 clinical trials) will be approved for patients.* Below is a snapshot of the current antibiotic pipeline, based on publicly available information and informed by external experts. It will be updated periodically, as products advance or are known to drop out of development. Because this list is updated periodically, endnote numbers may not be sequential. In September 2017, the antibiotics pipeline was expanded to include products in development globally. Please contact [email protected] with additions or updates. Expected activity Expected activity against CDC Development against resistant Drug name Company Drug class Target urgent or WHO Potential indication(s)?5 phase2 Gram-negative critical threat ESKAPE pathogens?3 pathogen?4 Approved for: Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections; other potential Baxdela Approved June 19, Melinta Bacterial type II Fluoroquinolone Possibly No indications: community-acquired bacterial (delafloxacin) 2017 (U.S. FDA) Therapeutics Inc. topoisomerase pneumonia and complicated urinary tract infections6 Approved for: Complicated urinary Rempex tract infections including pyelonephritis; Vabomere Pharmaceuticals β-lactam (carbapenem) other potential indications: complicated Approved Aug. 30, (Meropenem + Inc. (wholly owned + β-lactamase inhibitor PBP; β-lactamase Yes Yes (CRE) intra-abdominal infections, hospital- 2017 (U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • ESAC-Net Reporting Protocol 2019.Docx
    TESSy - The European Surveillance System Antimicrobial consumption (AMC) reporting protocol 2019 European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption Network (ESAC-Net) surveillance data for 2018 March 2019 Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................... 4 ESAC-Net ........................................................................................................................... 4 AMC metadata changes 2019 ............................................................................................... 5 Summary of the TESSy AMC data upload and validation process ........................................... 5 Annual ESAC-Net data collection .......................................................................................... 6 Overview of AMC data collection and analysis ....................................................................... 6 How to use this document .................................................................................................... 8 Finding further information .................................................................................................... 8 Reporting to TESSy ................................................................................................... 9 Data collection schedule ....................................................................................................... 9 Preparing data ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]