Affiliation:
1. The University of York, York, UK
2. Hull York Medical School, York, UK
3. Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK
4. York Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, York, UK
5. Nordic Pharma B. V., Baam, The Netherlands
Abstract
Introduction. Fosfomycin has retained activity against many multi-drug resistant (MDR) Gram-negatives, and may be useful against extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales to improve clinical outcomes.
Hypothesis/Gap Statement. There are few data from the UK on the susceptibility of invasive Gram-negative isolates to fosfomycin, especially in the era of increasing use of oral fosfomycin for urinary tract infections (UTIs).
Aim. We evaluated fosfomycin susceptibility against 100 consecutive Gram-negative bloodstream isolates, both individually, and in combination with other mechanistically similar and differing antibiotics. The aim was to investigate the synergy between antibiotic combinations against several E. coli, K. pneumoniae and P. aeruginosa isolates with variable levels of resistance.
Methodology. Disc diffusion and MIC test strip methods applying revised EUCAST guidelines for Fosfomycin were used, followed by the MTS™ ‘cross synergy’ method for ‘resistant’ isolates as defined below: (a) Fosfomycin resistant by MIC test strip; (b) MDR isolates defined as being resistant to ≥3 classes of antibiotics (based on routine sensitivity testing; beta lactams were considered as a single class), and/or (c) AMP C or ESBL or carbapenemase producers (or carbapenem resistant). FIC Index (Fractional Inhibitory Concentration Index) calculations were used to interpret findings, whereby: FIC = (MICA combination A+B/ MIC agent A) + (MICB combination A+B/ MIC agent B). A result of ≤0.5 was taken to indicate ‘synergy’, >0.5 and ≤1.0 to indicate ‘additive’ effect, >1.0 and ≤4.0 to indicate ‘indifference’, and >4.0 to indicate ‘antagonism’.
Results. We found that 95/100 isolates were susceptible to fosfomycin by MIC test strip, with 88/100 isolates susceptible to fosfomycin by disc, based on EUCAST guideline breakpoints. A total of 30/100 isolates (the more ‘resistant’ of the 100) were eligible for synergy testing according to our definitions (see Methodology), with the remaining 70 isolates not tested further. Seventeen out of 30 were MDR, 2/30 were AMP C producers and 9/30 were ESBL producers. Overall, 34/300 (11 %) of all combination tests showed synergy and 161/300 (54 %) were additive. Synergy was most commonly detected between fosfomycin and beta-lactam antibiotics, including piperacillin/tazobactam (10/30; 33 %), ceftazidime/avibactam (10/30; 30 %), and temocillin (8/30; 27 %). An additive effect was most commonly detected with aztreonam (25/30; 83 %) and meropenem (25/30; 83 %), but 100 % indifference was found with tigecycline (30/30). No antagonism was identified with any antibiotic combination.
Conclusion. Fosfomycin non-susceptibility by MIC test strip was unusual. Synergy was variable when combining fosfomycin with other antibiotics against the more ‘resistant’ isolates. Synergistic/additive effects were detected for beta-lactam/fosfomycin combinations in >80 % of all such combinations, suggesting beta-lactams may be the preferred partner for fosfomycin. Agents with a discordant site of action were more likely to result in indifference. Antagonism was not detected.
Subject
Microbiology (medical),General Medicine,Microbiology
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献