Efficacy of colistin alone and in various combinations for the treatment of experimental osteomyelitis due to carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae.
Crémieux. Anne-Claude AC; Dinh. Aurélien A; Nordmann. Patrice P; Mouton. William W; Tattevin. Pierre P; Ghout. Idir I; Jayol. Aurelie A; Aimer. Omar O; Gatin. Laure L; Verdier. Marie-Clémence MC; Saleh-Mghir. Azzam A; Laurent. Frédéric F
Key Findings
- Colistin alone was ineffective in the rabbit bone infection model
- Combining colistin with meropenem or fosfomycin was synergistic and cleared the infection
- Adding tigecycline to colistin reduced its effectiveness
- Colistin‑resistant bacteria emerged in most groups except the colistin‑fosfomycin combo
- Two resistant strains also showed cross‑resistance to the host defence peptide LL‑37
Practical Outcomes
- If you’re experimenting with antibiotics or antimicrobial peptides, don’t rely on colistin by itself—use it with meropenem or fosfomycin for better results. Be aware that resistance to colistin may also diminish the natural activity of LL‑37, so indiscriminate colistin use could weaken innate immunity. Avoid combining colistin with tigecycline, as it may counteract the treatment.
Summary
The study shows that using colistin alone won’t clear a tough bone infection caused by a resistant Klebsiella strain, but pairing it with meropenem or fosfomycin works well, while adding tigecycline actually makes things worse. It also found that bacteria that become resistant to colistin can sometimes become resistant to the body’s own antimicrobial peptide LL‑37.
Abstract
In a new experimental model of carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae osteomyelitis we evaluated the efficacy of colistin alone and in various combinations and examined the emergence of colistin-resistant strains and cross-resistance to host defence peptides (HDPs). KPC-99YC is a clinical strain with intermediate susceptibility to meropenem (MIC = 4 mg/L) and full susceptibility to gentamicin, colistin and tigecycline (MICs = 1 mg/L) and fosfomycin (MIC = 32 mg/L). Time-kill curves were performed at 4× MIC. Osteomyelitis was induced in rabbits by tibial injection of 2 × 108 cfu. Treatment started 14 days later for 7 days in seven groups: (i) control; (ii) colistin; (iii) colistin + gentamicin; (iv) colistin + tigecycline; (v) colistin + meropenem; (vi) colistin + meropenem + gentamicin; and (vii) colistin + fosfomycin. In vitro, colistin was rapidly bactericidal, but regrowth occurred after 9 h. Combinations of colistin with meropenem or fosfomycin were synergistic, whereas combination with tigecycline was antagonistic. In vivo, colistin alone was not effective. Combinations of colistin with meropenem or fosfomycin were bactericidal (P < 0.001) and the addition of gentamicin enhanced the efficacy of colistin + meropenem (P = 0.025). Tigecycline reduced the efficacy of colistin (P = 0.007). Colistin-resistant strains emerged in all groups except colistin + fosfomycin and two strains showed cross-resistance to HDP LL-37. In this model, combinations of colistin plus meropenem, with or without gentamicin, or colistin plus fosfomycin were the only effective therapies. The combination of colistin and tigecycline should be administered with caution, as it may be antagonistic in vitro and in vivo.
Study Information
pubmed
2019
2019-09-01T00:00:00.000Z
10.1093/jac/dkz257
23
44