Modeling meropenem treatment, alone and in combination with daptomycin, for KPC- producing Klebsiella pneumoniae with unusually low carbapenem MICs.

Transcription

1 AAC Accepted Manuscript Posted Online 23 May 2016 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. doi: /aac Copyright 2016, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved. 1 2 Modeling meropenem treatment, alone and in combination with daptomycin, for KPC- producing Klebsiella pneumoniae with unusually low carbapenem MICs Gagetti P 1,2, Pasteran F 2, Martinez MP 1, Fatouraei, M 1, Gu J 1, Fernandez R 1, Paz L 1, Rose WE 3, Corso A 2 * and Rosato AE 1 * Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX.; 2 Servicio Antimicrobianos, INEI-ANLIS-Dr Carlos Malbrán, Buenos Aires Argentina. 3 School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin-Madison Corresponding authors: Adriana E Rosato (aerosato@houstonmethodist.org) Alejandra Corso (acorso@anlis.gov.ar)

2 Abstract Klebsiella pneumoniae producing carbapenemase (KPC) cause serious infections in debilitated and immunocompromised patients and are associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased mortality rates. Daptomycin is a lipopeptide used against S. aureus infection and considered inactive against Gram-negative bacteria. We investigate in this work the effectiveness of daptomycin/meropenem combination by synergy-kill curve and a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model. The combination may represent a novel therapeutic strategy against KPC infections

3 The management of infections due to Klebsiella pneumoniae (Kpn) has been complicated by emerging antimicrobial resistance, with 20-80% of Kpn being resistant to first line antibiotics cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones and carbapenems (1). Dissemination of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae can be largely attributed to organisms producing the Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC), a β-lactamase enzyme that confers resistance to carbapenem antimicrobials (1). As per the recent WHO Report Review, KPC-producing Kpn has spread all around the world representing a major cause of hospital acquired infections including pneumonia, bloodstream, newborn and intensive care units. These multidrug-resistant organisms cause infections associated with mortality ranging between 23-75% due to lack of active antimicrobial agents and underlying co-morbidities, as the therapeutic options for the treatment of KPC-producing Kpn infections are extremely limited (2). The standard therapy for Kpn infections is still monotherapy with either tigecycline or colistin (3, 4). However, these options are complicated by drug toxicity and failure rates comparable to those observed in patients that received inappropriate therapy (3, 4). For this reason, these plus other agents such as fosfomycin, selected aminoglycosides, rifampicin and carbapenems (meropenem; MEM), have been given as part of combination treatments with various degrees of success against KPC-producing Kpn (2, 5). In addition to lack of defined therapies, some KPC-producing Kpn isolates, regardless of carbapenemase production, display carbapenem susceptibility according to CLSI or EUCAST standards (6). Recent exploration of antimicrobial combinations has shown that antibiotics with limited-to-no activity can result in antimicrobial enhancement of primary agents, even in a setting where resistance to primary agents is present. Previously, we have shown that daptomycin (DAP) constitutes an option for treatment of refractory MRSA infections when administered in combination with β-lactams (7). DAP, a cyclic anionic 3

4 lipopeptide, is considered inactive against Gram-negative bacteria, in part because of the large size of the molecule which impairs the penetration of the outer membrane (8). We evaluated the effectiveness of combining DAP with MEM against KPC-producing 78 Kpn. Three K. pneumoniae KPC-2 producing clinical isolates obtained from the repository of the Laboratory of Reference at ANLIS (Buenos Aires, Argentina) were included: Kp1(M13403) and Kp2(M15075), both susceptible to carbapenems; and a carbapenem resistant strain, Kp3(M9885) (Table 1). Strains Kp4 (ATCC ) and Kp5 (ATCC 13833) were used as carbapenemase non-producer controls. Susceptibility to MEM and DAP were performed by both E-test (BioMerieux) and in-house microdilution according to manufacturer and CLSI guidelines, respectively. blakpc were characterized by PCR and DNA sequencing (6). MLST was performed according to Pasteur Institute recommendations ( (Table 1). The in vitro effectiveness of the combination DAP/MEM against strains Kp1 (Fig. 1a) and Kp2 (Fig. 1b) was analyzed by time-kill curves performed in Mueller-Hinton broth supplemented with 50 µg/ml of Ca 2+ for DAP. Subcultures were performed at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 24 and 30 hours (initial inoculum: 1x10 7 CFU/ml). At concentrations of MEM 6 µg/ml and DAP 10 µg/ml tested alone, DAP did not display any effect in growth, in agreement with the intrinsic resistance to this agent, while MEM despite being tested as susceptible (isolates Kp1-2), caused regrowth of cells after 24 h (Fig. 1) without significant bactericidal effects during in point in the exposure. MEM alone was active against carbapenemase non producer Kp4 strain displaying 7 log 10 CFU/ml decrease at 4 h (Fig. 1c); by contrast, MEM alone was not active against the KPC-2 producing Kp1 and Kp2 despite having similar MEM MICs. The combination DAP/MEM was highly synergistic, as 4

5 demonstrated by cell killing 5 log 10 CFU/mL at 24 h compared with that achieved with either single agents or the initial inoculum (Fig. 1). The observation that these strains manifested recurrent growth even during exposures above their MEM MIC values, led us to speculate the existence of a heteroresistant phenotype. We investigated the existence of sub-populations of resistant cells expressing different level of resistance to MEM by PAP (population analysis profile) (9). PAPs were performed by spreading approximately 10 8 bacterial CFU on MH agar plates with MEM in serial dilutions (concentrations ranging from 0.25 to 256µg/ml) and incubating for 48 h (9). The frequency of heteroresistant subpopulations at the highest drug concentration was calculated by dividing the number of colonies grown on antibiotic-containing plates by the colony counts from the same bacterial inoculum plated onto antibiotic-free plates. MIC stability was evaluated after seven daily subcultures in antibiotic-free medium. As shown in Fig. 2, all three KPCproducing Kpn strains (Kp1-3) were able to grow in concentrations of µg/ml with 113 a serial diluted inoculum (10 1 to 10 8 ). Consistent MIC increases from parent to derivative variants occurred, while no effect was observed in control strain Kp5 (Table 2). These observations explain the survival of Kp1-3 at bactericidal concentrations of MEM despite having displayed a susceptible phenotype. This corroborates a recent study by Nodari et al. showing that heteroresistance in KPC-producing Kpn strains is directly associated with the presence of carbapenemase, a phenomenon that was not observed in the non-kpc group of strains analyzed (10). We have previously demonstrated that the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) model is a valuable tool to evaluate the effectiveness of novel antimicrobial combinations (11, 12, 13) by simulating one-compartment antibiotic exposures of single and combined antibiotic therapy (11, 14). Experiments were performed in duplicate 5

6 over 48 h using overnight cultures of Kp1 (M13403) adjusted to a 0.5 McFarland and diluted to obtain a starting inoculum of approximately 10 6 CFU/ml. The following antibiotic regimens were evaluated: MEM 1000 mg every 8 h (targeted maximum free drug concentration [fcmax], 49 µg/ml; half-life, 1h) and DAP 10 mg/kg every 24 h ([fcmax], 11.3 µg/ml; half-life, 8h) (11). Modeling of antibiotics in combination with two different elimination rates was performed according to the methods described by J. Blaser (15) where supplemental doses of the slower cleared antibiotic were administered to account for drug loss from the more rapid flow rate of the combination. Samples were retrieved at pre-specified time-points from the model for bacterial quantification. Antibiotic activity (MEM versus DAP/MEM) was evaluated by extent and rate of bacterial kill over the duration of the simulation by t-test. As shown in Fig. 3, MEM alone was highly active in the first 3 doses up to 24 h, but failed to suppress growth thereafter. Consistent with this regrowth, Kp1 cultured from the 48 h time point with MEM alone treatment resulted in a 64-fold less susceptible organism (MEM MIC 32 µg/ml versus 0.5µg/ml) prior to the experiment, in concordance with PAP assay. DAP alone had no antimicrobial activity. However, the DAP/MEM combination resulted in a faster time-to-kill to the limit of detection (6 h with combination versus 24 h with MEM alone) and significantly lower bacterial burden at the end of treatment (2.5 ± 0.4 versus 6.3 ± 0.2 log 10 CFU/mL, respectively; p= 0.007; Fig. 3). Importantly, the DAP/MEM regimen prevented the development of MEM resistance (MIC 0.5 µg/ml at 48 h). In conclusion, our results showed that 1- MEM alone was inactive against KPCproducing Kpn strains displaying MEM MICs considered as susceptible by both CLSI and EUCAST guidelines, indicating that MIC values may not be sufficient to predict a successful treatment outcome, as revealed by recent surveys showing that only 14-20% 6

7 of the carbapenemase-producing isolates were susceptible to MEM in a large-scale surveillance program (16); 2- DAP/MEM may represent a novel therapeutic strategy against KPC- producing Kpn infections; 3- although a limited number of strains was tested, the heteroresistance phenotype in carbapenem susceptible KPC-producers represents a new finding in Kpn; and 4- the fact that DAP may extend its usefulness to Gram-negative infections in combination with MEM, and perhaps other carbapenems, makes this strategy very attractive as a broad spectrum option. The molecular bases and mechanisms involved in DAP/MEM interactions against KPC-producing Kpn strains remains unknown and further studies are currently in progress Funding This work was supported in part from the National Institutes of Health grant (1R56AI A1 to AER) and by the regular federal budget of the Ministry of Health of Argentina. WER and AER have received grant support from Merck unrelated to this work. The other authors on this study have no relevant financial interests to report Transparency declaration None to declare

8 174 8

9 175 REFERENCES Nordmann, P., L. Dortet, and L. Poirel Carbapenem resistance in Enterobacteriaceae: here is the storm! Trends Mol.Med. 18: doi:s (12) [pii]; /j.molmed [doi] Pitout, J. D., P. Nordmann, and L. Poirel Carbapenemase-Producing Klebsiella pneumoniae, a Key Pathogen Set for Global Nosocomial Dominance. Antimicrob.Agents Chemother. 59: doi:aac [pii]; /aac [doi] Tumbarello, M., E. M. Trecarichi, F. G. De Rosa, M. Giannella, D. R. Giacobbe, M. Bassetti, A. R. Losito, M. Bartoletti, B. Del, V, S. Corcione, G. Maiuro, S. Tedeschi, L. Celani, C. S. Cardellino, T. Spanu, A. Marchese, S. Ambretti, R. Cauda, C. Viscoli, and P. Viale Infections caused by KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae: differences in therapy and mortality in a multicentre study. J.Antimicrob.Chemother. 70: doi:dkv086 [pii]; /jac/dkv086 [doi] Tumbarello, M., P. Viale, M. Bassetti, F. G. De Rosa, T. Spanu, and C. Viscoli Infections caused by KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae: differences in therapy and mortality in a multicentre study--authors' response. J.Antimicrob.Chemother. 70:2922. doi:dkv200 [pii]; /jac/dkv200 [doi] Petrosillo, N., M. Giannella, R. Lewis, and P. Viale Treatment of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae: the state of the art. Expert.Rev.Anti.Infect.Ther. 11: doi: /eri [doi]. 9

10 Veliz O, Pasteran F and Guerriero L, Gomez SFaccone and Corso. Emergence of Ertapenem Susceptible (ETP S) KPC-Producing Enterobactericeae (KPC-PE) with conflicting susceptibility results by reference and routine methods. 53rd ICAAC Ref Type: Abstract Mehta, S., C. Singh, K. B. Plata, P. K. Chanda, A. Paul, S. Riosa, R. R. Rosato, and A. E. Rosato beta-lactams increase the antibacterial activity of daptomycin against clinical MRSA strains and prevent selection of DAPresistant derivatives. Antimicrob.Agents Chemother. doi:aac [pii]; /aac [doi] Randall, C. P., K. R. Mariner, I. Chopra, and A. J. O'Neill The target of daptomycin is absent from Escherichia coli and other gram-negative pathogens. Antimicrob.Agents Chemother. 57: doi:aac [pii]; /aac [doi] Pournaras, S., I. Kristo, G. Vrioni, A. Ikonomidis, A. Poulou, D. Petropoulou, and A. Tsakris Characteristics of meropenem heteroresistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing clinical isolates of K. pneumoniae. J.Clin.Microbiol. 48: doi:jcm [pii]; /jcm [doi] Nodari, C. S., V. B. Ribeiro, and A. L. Barth Imipenem heteroresistance: high prevalence among Enterobacteriaceae Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase producers. J.Med.Microbiol. 64: doi:jmm [pii]; /jmm [doi]. 10

11 Rose, W. E., M. J. Rybak, and G. W. Kaatz Evaluation of daptomycin treatment of Staphylococcus aureus bacterial endocarditis: an in vitro and in vivo simulation using historical and current dosing strategies. J.Antimicrob.Chemother. 60: doi:dkm170 [pii]; /jac/dkm170 [doi] Bowker, K. E., H. A. Holt, R. J. Lewis, D. S. Reeves, and A. P. MacGowan Comparative pharmacodynamics of meropenem using an in-vitro model to simulate once, twice and three times daily dosing in humans. J.Antimicrob.Chemother. 42: Bowker, K. E., A. R. Noel, and A. P. MacGowan Pharmacodynamics of minocycline against Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro pharmacokinetic model. Antimicrob.Agents Chemother. 52: doi:aac [pii]; /aac [doi] Rose, W. E., L. T. Schulz, D. Andes, R. Striker, A. D. Berti, P. R. Hutson, and S. K. Shukla Addition of ceftaroline to daptomycin after emergence of daptomycin-nonsusceptible Staphylococcus aureus during therapy improves antibacterial activity. Antimicrob.Agents Chemother. 56: doi:aac [pii]; /aac [doi] Blaser, J In-vitro model for simultaneous simulation of the serum kinetics of two drugs with different half-lives. J.Antimicrob.Chemother. 15 Suppl A: Fattouh, R., N. Tijet, A. McGeer, S. M. Poutanen, R. G. Melano, and S. N. Patel What is the appropriate meropenem MIC for Screening of 11

12 Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in low prevalence settings? Antimicrob.Agents Chemother. doi:aac [pii]; /aac [doi] Figure legends FIG 1. Analysis of MEM, DAP and DAP/MEM antibacterial efficacy against (a) Kp1 M13403, (b) Kp2 M15075, and (c) Kp4 ATCC Time-kill analyses were performed with a 10 6 CFU/ml inoculum at 0, 2, 4, 8, 24 and 30 h and the specified concentrations of antibiotics: DAP, 10 µg/ml; MEM, 6 /ml. A minimum of three independent experiments were performed FIG 2. Population analysis profile (PAP) of MEM resistance of KPC-producing Kpn strains. Phenotypic expression of MEM resistance was measured from overnight cultures from Kp1 (M13403), Kp2 (M15075), Kp3 (M9885) and Kp5 (ATCC 13833) strains, plated at various dilutions on MH plates containing a series of concentrations of MEM and incubated at 37 C for 48 h, after which the bacterial colonies were counted. The results of a representative study are shown. Two other experiments gave similar results. 12

13 FIG 3. Activity of single and combination antibiotic simulations in the PK/PD model against Kp1 M MEM 1000 mg q8h or DAP 10 mg/kg q24h were modeled alone and in combination over 48 h duration. Two independent replicates for each regimen were performed TABLE 1. Strains used in this study and minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) for MEM and DAP Strain Genotype Acquired β-lactamases MLST MIC (µg/ml) MEM IPM EPM DAP BMD Etest BMD Etest BMD Etest Etest Kp1 (M13403) KPC-2 ST Kp2 KPC-2; (M15075) CTXM-2 ST Kp3 (M9885) KPC-2 ST >32 > Kp4 (ATCC ) SHV-18 NA NA: Not assigned; BMD: Broth microdilution

14 TABLE 2. Frequency of KPC Heteroresistance to MEM detected by population analysis profile (PAP). KPC strains MEM MICs by PAP (µg/ml) MEM concentration Of highest growth (µg/ml) Kp1 (M13403) x 10-7 Heteroresistance frequency Kp2 (M15075) x 10-7 Kp3 (M9885) x Kp5(ATCC13833) Non-detectable

15 FIG 1 FIG 1. Analysis of MEM, DAP and DAP/MEM antibacterial efficacy against (a) Kp1 M13403, (b) Kp2 M15075, and (c) Kp4 ATCC Time-kill analyses were performed with a 10 6 CFU/ml inoculum at 0, 2, 4, 8, 24 and 30 h and the specified concentrations of antibiotics: DAP, 10 µg/ml; MEM, 6 µg/ml. A minimum of three independent experiments were performed.

16 FIG 2 FIG 2. Population analysis profile (PAP) of MEM resistance of KPC-producing Kpn strains. Phenotypic expression of MEM resistance was measured from overnight cultures from Kp1 (M13403), Kp2 (M15075), Kp3 (M9885) and Kp5 (ATCC 13833) strains, plated at various dilutions on MH plates containing a series of concentrations of MEM and incubated at 37 C for 48 h, after which the bacterial colonies were counted. The results of a representative study are shown. Two other experiments gave similar results. FIG 3 FIG 3. Activity of single and combination antibiotic simulations in the PK/PD model against Kp1 M MEM 1000 mg q8h or DAP 10 mg/kg q24h were modeled alone and in combination over 48 h duration. Two independent replicates for each regimen were performed.