1. Academic Validation
  2. In vitro activity of cefepime/zidebactam and cefepime/taniborbactam against aztreonam/avibactam-resistant NDM-like-producing Escherichia coli clinical isolates

In vitro activity of cefepime/zidebactam and cefepime/taniborbactam against aztreonam/avibactam-resistant NDM-like-producing Escherichia coli clinical isolates

  • J Antimicrob Chemother. 2023 Mar 15;dkad061. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkad061.
Christophe Le Terrier 1 2 Patrice Nordmann 1 3 4 Mustafa Sadek 1 5 Laurent Poirel 1 3
Affiliations

Affiliations

  • 1 Faculty of Science and Medicine, Emerging Antibiotic Resistance Unit, Medical and Molecular Microbiology, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.
  • 2 Division of Intensive Care Unit, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • 3 Swiss National Reference Center for Emerging Antibiotic Resistance, Microbiology Unit, Fribourg, Switzerland.
  • 4 Institute for Microbiology, University of Lausanne and University Hospital Center, Lausanne, Switzerland.
  • 5 Department of Food Hygiene and Control, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, South Valley University, Qena, Egypt.
Abstract

Background: Aztreonam/avibactam is one of the last therapeutic options for treating infections caused by NDM-like-producing Enterobacterales. However, PBP3-modified and NDM-producing Escherichia coli strains that co-produce CMY-42 have been shown to be resistant to this drug combination. The aim of our study was to assess the in vitro activity of cefepime/taniborbactam and cefepime/zidebactam against such aztreonam/avibactam-resistant E. coli strains.

Methods: MIC values of aztreonam, aztreonam/avibactam, cefepime, cefepime/taniborbactam, cefepime/zidebactam and zidebactam alone were determined for 28 clinical aztreonam/avibactam-resistant E. coli isolates. Those isolates produced either NDM-5 (n = 24), NDM-4 (n = 2) or NDM-1 (n = 2), and they all co-produced CMY-42 (n = 28). They all harboured a four amino acid insertion in PBP-3 (Tyr-Arg-Ile-Asn or Tyr-Arg-Ile-Lys).

Results: All strains were resistant to aztreonam/avibactam and cefepime, as expected. The resistance rate to cefepime/taniborbactam was 100%, with MIC50 and MIC90 being at 16 mg/L and 64 mg/L, respectively. Conversely, all strains were susceptible to cefepime/zidebactam, with both MIC50 and MIC90 at 0.25 mg/L. Notably, all strains showed low MICs for zidebactam alone, with MIC50 and MIC90 at 0.5 mg/L and 1 mg/L.

Conclusions: Our data highlighted the excellent in vitro performance of the newly developed β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combination cefepime/zidebactam against aztreonam/avibactam-resistant E. coli strains, suggesting that this combination could be considered as an efficient therapeutic option in this context. Our study also highlights the cross-resistance between acquired resistance to aztreonam/avibactam and the cefepime/taniborbactam combination.

Figures
Products