Compensatory Evolution of pbp Mutations Restores the Fitness Cost Imposed by β-Lactam Resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae

The prevalence of antibiotic resistance genes in pathogenic bacteria is a major challenge to treating many infectious diseases. The spread of these genes is driven by the strong selection imposed by the use of antibacterial drugs. However, in the absence of drug selection, antibiotic resistance genes impose a fitness cost, which can be ameliorated by compensatory mutations. In Streptococcus pneumoniae, β-lactam resistance is caused by mutations in three penicillin-binding proteins, PBP1a, PBP2x, and PBP2b, all of which are implicated in cell wall synthesis and the cell division cycle. We found that the fitness cost and cell division defects conferred by pbp2b mutations (as determined by fitness competitive assays in vitro and in vivo and fluorescence microscopy) were fully compensated by the acquisition of pbp2x and pbp1a mutations, apparently by means of an increased stability and a consequent mislocalization of these protein mutants. Thus, these compensatory combinations of pbp mutant alleles resulted in an increase in the level and spectrum of β-lactam resistance. This report describes a direct correlation between antibiotic resistance increase and fitness cost compensation, both caused by the same gene mutations acquired by horizontal transfer. The clinical origin of the pbp mutations suggests that this intergenic compensatory process is involved in the persistence of β-lactam resistance among circulating strains. We propose that this compensatory mechanism is relevant for β-lactam resistance evolution in Streptococcus pneumoniae

ε/ζ systems: their role in resistance, virulence, and their potential for antibiotic development

Cell death in bacteria can be triggered by activation of self-inflicted molecular mechanisms. Pathogenic bacteria often make use of suicide mechanisms in which the death of individual cells benefits survival of the population. Important elements for programmed cell death in bacteria are proteinaceous toxin–antitoxin systems. While the toxin generally resides dormant in the bacterial cytosol in complex with its antitoxin, conditions such as impaired de novo synthesis of the antitoxin or nutritional stress lead to antitoxin degradation and toxin activation. A widespread toxin–antitoxin family consists of the ε/ζ systems, which are distributed over plasmids and chromosomes of various pathogenic bacteria. In its inactive state, the bacteriotoxic ζ toxin protein is inhibited by its cognate antitoxin ε. Upon degradation of ε, the ζ toxin is released allowing this enzyme to poison bacterial cell wall synthesis, which eventually triggers autolysis. ε/ζ systems ensure stable plasmid inheritance by inducing death in plasmid-deprived offspring cells. In contrast, chromosomally encoded ε/ζ systems were reported to contribute to virulence of pathogenic bacteria, possibly by inducing autolysis in individual cells under stressful conditions. The capability of toxin–antitoxin systems to kill bacteria has made them potential targets for new therapeutic compounds. Toxin activation could be hijacked to induce suicide of bacteria. Likewise, the unique mechanism of ζ toxins could serve as template for new drugs. Contrarily, inhibition of virulence-associated ζ toxins might attenuate infections. Here we provide an overview of ε/ζ toxin–antitoxin family and its potential role in the development of new therapeutic approaches in microbial defense

Review of methods used by chiropractors to determine the site for applying manipulation

Background: With the development of increasing evidence for the use of manipulation in the management of musculoskeletal conditions, there is growing interest in identifying the appropriate indications for care. Recently, attempts have been made to develop clinical prediction rules, however the validity of these clinical prediction rules remains unclear and their impact on care delivery has yet to be established. The current study was designed to evaluate the literature on the validity and reliability of the more common methods used by doctors of chiropractic to inform the choice of the site at which to apply spinal manipulation. Methods: Structured searches were conducted in Medline, PubMed, CINAHL and ICL, supported by hand searches of archives, to identify studies of the diagnostic reliability and validity of common methods used to identify the site of treatment application. To be included, studies were to present original data from studies of human subjects and be designed to address the region or location of care delivery. Only English language manuscripts from peer-reviewed journals were included. The quality of evidence was ranked using QUADAS for validity and QAREL for reliability, as appropriate. Data were extracted and synthesized, and were evaluated in terms of strength of evidence and the degree to which the evidence was favourable for clinical use of the method under investigation. Results: A total of 2594 titles were screened from which 201 articles met all inclusion criteria. The spectrum of manuscript quality was quite broad, as was the degree to which the evidence favoured clinical application of the diagnostic methods reviewed. The most convincing favourable evidence was for methods which confirmed or provoked pain at a specific spinal segmental level or region. There was also high quality evidence supporting the use, with limitations, of static and motion palpation, and measures of leg length inequality. Evidence of mixed quality supported the use, with limitations, of postural evaluation. The evidence was unclear on the applicability of measures of stiffness and the use of spinal x-rays. The evidence was of mixed quality, but unfavourable for the use of manual muscle testing, skin conductance, surface electromyography and skin temperature measurement. Conclusions: A considerable range of methods is in use for determining where in the spine to administer spinal manipulation. The currently published evidence falls across a spectrum ranging from strongly favourable to strongly unfavourable in regard to using these methods. In general, the stronger and more favourable evidence is for those procedures which take a direct measure of the presumptive site of care– methods involving pain provocation upon palpation or localized tissue examination. Procedures which involve some indirect assessment for identifying the manipulable lesion of the spine–such as skin conductance or thermography–tend not to be supported by the available evidence.https://doi.org/10.1186/2045-709X-21-3