Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction/Pooled Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing Was Not Associated with Increased Antibiotic Resistance in Management of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections

Howard J Korman,1 Mohit Mathur,2 Natalie Luke,2 Dakun Wang,3 Xihua Zhao,4 Michael Levin,1 David L Wenzler,1 David Baunoch5 1Comprehensive Urology Division, Michigan Healthcare Professionals, Royal Oak, MI, USA; 2Department of Medical Affairs, Pathnostics, Irvine, CA, USA; 3Department of Writing, Stat4Ward, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 4Department of Statistical Analysis, Stat4Ward, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 5Department of Research and Development, Pathnostics, Irvine, CA, USACorrespondence: Mohit Mathur, Pathnostics, 15545 Sand Canyon Suite 100, Irvine, CA, 92618, USA, Email [email protected]: To compare antibiotic resistance results at different time points in patients with urinary tract infections (UTIs), who were either treated based upon a combined multiplex polymerase chain reaction (M-PCR) and pooled antibiotic susceptibility test (P-AST) or were not treated.Methods: The M-PCR/P-AST test utilized here detects 30 UTI pathogens or group of pathogens, 32 antibiotic resistance (ABR) genes, and phenotypic susceptibility to 19 antibiotics. We compared the presence or absence of ABR genes and the number of resistant antibiotics, at baseline (Day 0) and 5– 28 days (Day 5– 28) after clinical management in the antibiotic-treated (n = 52) and untreated groups (n = 12).Results: Our results demonstrated that higher percentage of patients had a reduction in ABR gene detection in the treated compared to the untreated group (38.5% reduction vs 0%, p = 0.01). Similarly, significantly more patients had reduced numbers of resistant antibiotics, as measured by the phenotypic P-AST component of the test, in the treated than in the untreated group (42.3% reduction vs 8.3%, p = 0.04).Conclusion: Our results with both resistance gene and phenotypic antibiotic susceptibility results demonstrated that treatment based upon rapid and sensitive M-PCR/P-AST resulted in reduction rather than induction of antibiotic resistance in symptomatic patients with suspected complicated UTI (cUTI) in an urology setting, indicating this type of test is valuable in the management of these types of patients. Further studies of the causes of gene reduction, including elimination of ABR gene-carrying bacteria and loss of ABR gene(s), are warranted.Keywords: urinary tract infection, complicated urinary tract infection, antibiotic resistance, antibiotic resistance genes, diagnostic testing, polymerase chain reactio

Lipoglycopeptide Antibacterial Agents in Gram-Positive Infections: A Comparative Review.

Oritavancin, telavancin, and dalbavancin are recently marketed lipoglycopeptides that exhibit remarkable differences to conventional molecules. While dalbavancin inhibits the late stages of peptidoglycan synthesis by mainly impairing transglycosylase activity, oritavancin and telavancin anchor in the bacterial membrane by the lipophilic side chain linked to their disaccharidic moiety, disrupting membrane integrity and causing bacteriolysis. Oritavancin keeps activity against vancomycin-resistant enterocococci, being a stronger inhibitor of transpeptidase than of transglycosylase activity. These molecules have potent activity against Gram-positive organisms, most notably staphylococci (including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and to some extent vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus), streptococci (including multidrug-resistant pneumococci), and Clostridia. All agents are indicated for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, and telavancin, for hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia. While telavancin is administered daily at 10 mg/kg, the remarkably long half-lives of oritavancin and dalbavancin allow for infrequent dosing (single dose of 1200 mg for oritavancin and 1000 mg at day 1 followed by 500 mg at day 8 for dalbavancin), which could be exploited in the future for outpatient therapy. Among possible safety issues evidenced during clinical development were an increased risk of developing osteomyelitis with oritavancin; taste disturbance, nephrotoxicity, and risk of corrected QT interval prolongation (especially in the presence of at-risk co-medications) with telavancin; and elevation of hepatic enzymes with dalbavancin. Interference with coagulation tests has been reported with oritavancin and telavancin. These drugs proved non-inferior to conventional treatments in clinical trials but their advantages may be better evidenced upon future evaluation in more severe infections