Clinical significance of antimicrobial resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae.
Streptococcus pneumoniae is a common cause of community-acquired bacterial respiratory infections, including pneumonia, meningitis, bacteraemia, otitis media, and sinusitis, and is the pathogen least likely to resolve without treatment. (1) The pneumococcus accounts for more than a third of acute bacterial sinusitis, over half of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, and nearly a third of acute otitis media in children. In adults it is responsible for 20-75% of community-acquired pneumonia, 15-30% of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis, and 20-40% of acute sinusitis. (2) Of particular concern is the estimated annual incidence of 150 million cases of clinical pneumonia in children under 5 years of age in developing countries, with 11-20 million severe enough to require hospitalisation, compared with an annual incidence of 2.1 million cases in developed countries. (3) More than 4 800 deaths are estimated to have occurred from invasive pneumococcal disease in the USA in 2005. (4)
The capsular polysaccharide is the major virulence factor for pneumococcal disease and also provides the antigenic target for production of protective antibodies either naturally or by vaccine. There are at least 90 immunologically distinct capsular serotypes in 21 numbered serogroups, each containing 2-5 related serotypes, with a total of 65 such serotypes, and another 25 individually numbered serotypes. Sequential serotypes of pneumococci colonise the nasopharynx, beginning within a few months of birth and continuing throughout adolescence and adulthood. (5) Most serotypes colonise the nasopharynx for a month to a year, and are then replaced by another, with immunity developing to each colonising serotype sequentially, and duration and prevalence of colonisation decreasing with age. The prevalent serotypes carried differ between adults and children, with most of the serotypes carried by children under 3 years of age belonging or related to those included in the recently licensed 7-valent protein-conjugated pneumococcal vaccine (4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F, 23F), although serotypes 1, 3, 5, and 7F are important in this age group in developing countries. (6) Person-to-person transmission of S. pneumoniae is direct or through fomites, and is facilitated by crowding, such as in day-care centres. Pneumococcal disease occurs when an intercurrent event, such as an acute viral infection, damages the respiratory epithelium, resulting in infections of the middle ear space, mastoid air spaces, paranasal sinuses, bronchi and lung parenchyma, or in bacteraemia with haematogenous spread to other sites such as the meninges and joint spaces.
Work on pneumococcal vaccines began in 1911 in South Africa by Sir Almroth Wright and subsequently F Spencer Lister because of the extremely high incidence and mortality of lobar pneumonia in workers in gold and diamond mines. (7) The annual incidence in one diamond mine between 1908 and 1911 was 70-154 per 1 000 and mortality 14-29 per 1 000. The efficacy of these early, killed, whole-cell vaccines was striking, with the annual incidence of lobar pneumonia in this mine reduced to <5 per 1 000 and mortality <1 per 1 000 per year by 1916-1917. A similar result was reported by Cecil and Austin on a killed, whole-cell vaccine used in an American army camp in 1918. In 1977, the first modern pneumococcal vaccine, a 14-valent purified capsular polysaccharide vaccine targeted at elderly and high-risk populations, was approved. (8,9) In 1983, it was replaced by a 23-valent polysaccharide vaccine (Pneumovax 23, Merck, Whitehouse Station, NJ) that included antigen from the 23 serotypes that cause 88% of invasive diseases in adults and cross-reactivity for types that account for an additional 8% of invasive disease. (10) The vaccine is estimated to be about 60-70% effective against invasive disease. As polysaccharide vaccines are ineffective in children under 2 years of age, various protein-polysaccharide conjugated vaccines have been developed, and a 7-valent vaccine (Prevnar, Wyeth-Lederle, Pearl River, NY) was introduced in the USA in 2000. (11) The vaccine contains purified polysaccharides from the 7 serotypes commonly responsible for invasive disease in children in the USA, including the 5 most often found to be highly or multiply drug resistant. Recent studies have shown it to be efficacious in preventing invasive disease as well as carriage and associated respiratory infections caused by the vaccine serotypes. (12) Less encouraging news is the emergence of replacement serotypes, particularly 19A, which are equally invasive and multiply drug resistant. (13,14)
Development of resistance
Pneumococcal disease was one of the first infectious diseases against which targeted therapy was aimed, with type-specific equine and rabbit antisera, optochin and early sulfonamides studied during the second and third decades of the 20th century. (7,9) The introduction of penicillin G in the 1940s replaced these earlier therapies, and the subsequent introduction of tetracyclines, chloramphenicol, macrolides, lincosamides, vancomycin, newer sulfonamides, trimethoprim, fluoroquinolones and linezolid provided additional therapeutic options. (1,15,16) It is noteworthy that resistance to most of these antimicrobial agents was described soon after their introduction, although reports of resistance between 1950 and 1975 were infrequent, and little penicillin resistance of clinical significance was reported. This situation changed drastically in 1977 with the isolation of serotype 19A isolates from children with bacteraemia and meningitis in Durban and Johannesburg, South Africa, that were highly resistant to penicillin G and other [beta]-lactams as well as chloramphenicol. (17,18) These strains were resistant to ampicillin and chloramphenicol, the agents of choice for empiric treatment of meningitis at that time. Many of the Johannesburg isolates were also resistant to macrolides, lincosamides, tetracycline and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole.
Clinical significance of resistance
Since the largest number of prescriptions for antimicrobials is for respiratory infections in outpatients, there is considerable selective pressure on the pathogens causing these diseases. This generally occurs at the site of carriage of these bacteria (the nasopharynx) but can occasionally occur at the site of infection. In addition, the other colonising flora, such as viridans group streptococci, are exposed to these agents and often develop resistance which can in turn be transferred to S. pneumoniae. Resistance to antimicrobial agents in the major bacterial respiratory tract pathogens has increased alarmingly in recent years, leading to a need to re-evaluate empiric treatment choices. Drug resistance emerges more rapidly in the paediatric population than in adults, largely as a function of the higher frequency and density of bacterial colonisation of the nasopharynx in children. (5) Antimicrobials should therefore be used judiciously as a large proportion of respiratory infections are viral in origin, where no antibiotic is indicated, and many bacterial infections resolve without antimicrobial treatment. (19,20)
Our understanding of the relationships between in vitro and in vivo susceptibility of pneumococci has been limited by the lack of adequate clinical studies. These limitations have to a large extent been overcome recently with bacteriological outcome otitis media studies (21) and with the development of the field of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (PK/PD), which enables extrapolation of animal model data to humans. (22) Pharmacokinetics describes the body's absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination of drugs, while pharmacodynamics examines the in vivo relationship between the target pathogen and the antimicrobial agent over time, taking into account the effects of variations in drug concentrations on organism growth dynamics. Antimicrobials can be divided into time- and concentration-dependent agents based on PK/PD relationships. For time-dependent agents such as [beta]-lactams, the duration of the nonprotein-bound (free or active) drug concentration in plasma over time relative to the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the agent against a pathogen will determine in vivo bacterial killing. For S. pneumoniae the free (non-protein-bound) plasma concentration of a [beta]-lactam should be above the MIC of the agent for at least 30-35% of the dosing interval for penicillins, 40-50% for cephalosporins and 20-25% for carbapenems. Thus the free plasma concentrations of an agent, based on standard dosing regimens, achieved for the required proportion of the dosing interval can be determined and used as the susceptibility limit or pharmacodynamic breakpoint. (22) Most agents other than [beta]-lactams are concentration dependent, with the ratio of non-protein-bound plasma area-under-the-curve (AUC) value over 24 hours to MICs ([AUC.sub.24]:MIC ratio) correlated with in vivo efficacy. Target [AUC.sub.24]:MIC ratios required for clinical success vary between drug classes, and are around 30 for macrolides, lincosamides and fluoroquinolones, and 80 for linezolid; susceptibility breakpoints for these agents can therefore be calculated by dividing [AUC.sub.24] values by the applicable target. Susceptibility breakpoints for time- and concentration-dependent agents based on plasma pharmacokinetics are generally applicable to extracellular infections at body sites where extracellular fluid levels are directly related to non-protein-bound plasma levels, such as the respiratory tract and dermis, but not to sites such as the central nervous system, where drug penetration may be limited. Application of PK/PD principles and appropriate clinical data has resulted in the development of clinically relevant breakpoints for S. pneumoniae infections for a variety of sites of infection and dosing regimens (Tables I and II).
Strains of S. pneumoniae were exquisitely susceptible to penicillin G, with MICs of [less than or equal to] 0.06 [micro]g/ml when this agent was first introduced and used clinically in the 1940s and 1950s. In fact, the vast majority of strains at that time had penicillin G MICs ranging from 0.015 [micro] g/ml to 0.03 [micro] g/ml; this is therefore referred to as the baseline activity of penicillin G against 'wild-type' S. pneumoniae. (23) Decreased susceptibility to penicillin G among a few isolates of S. pneumoniae was noted in the 1960s in Australia and New Guinea, with MICs of 0.1-1 [micro]g/ml; and in the 1970s in South Africa, isolates were noted to have penicillin G MICs as high as 2-4 [micro]g/ml. (17,18) Compared with fully susceptible isolates, the most resistant of these strains were only inhibited by a more than 200-fold greater concentration and other [beta]-lactams. Penicillin G MICs at this time were arbitrarily classified by MIC range as susceptible (MICs [less than or equal to] 0.06 [micro]g/ml), intermediate (0.12-1 [micro]g/ml) and resistant ([greater than or equal to] 2 [micro]g/ml), as this had direct relevance to meningitis and to prediciting susceptibility of penicillin-susceptible isolates to other [beta]-lactams. (18,22)
However, this classification of penicillin MICs was confusing and led to inappropriate clinical applications; therefore, 'non-susceptible' strains are best considered to be [beta]-lactam challenged as this challenge can be overcome in many instances with appropriate dosing regimens. This situation has now largely been clarified by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), with the development of clinically relevant susceptibility breakpoints for most [beta]-lactams based on dosing regimen and site of infection, with breakpoints differing for meningeal and non-meningeal infections. (24) The susceptible penicillin G breakpoint remains at [less than or equal to] 0.06 [micro]g/ml for meningitis and for prediction of susceptibility to other [beta]-lactams, while new susceptibility breakpoints for non-meningeal infections have been established at [less than or equal to] 2 [micro]g/ml for parenteral penicillin G dosed at 12 million units/day and [less than or equal to] 4 [micro]g/ml at 18-24 million units/day ([less than or equal to] 2 [micro]g/ml, susceptible; 4 [micro]g/ml, intermediate; [greater than or equal to] 8 [micro]g/ml, resistant). (24) Recent international surveillance studies have demonstrated that about 50% of strains of S. pneumoniae still have penicillin G MICs in the 'fully' susceptible range of [less than or equal to] 0.06 [micro]g/ml, with 18-20% in the original intermediate range (0.12-1 [micro]g/ml) and 12-33% in the original resistant range ([greater than or equal to] 2 [micro]g/ml), (25-27) and these interpretations are still valid for meningitis. Application of the new penicillin G breakpoints for non-meningeal infections to one dataset results in 92.6% of isolates being susceptible ([less than or equal to] 2 [micro] g/ml), 7.1% intermediate (4 [micro]g ml) and 0.3% resistant ([greater than or equal to] 8 [micro]g/ml) (Fig. 1). (27) Although currently rare, highly penicillin G-resistant strains with MICs [greater than or equal to] 8 [micro]g/ml are of concern should they proliferate. (28)
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
In general, the MIC distributions for all other [beta]-lactams against S. pneumoniae also range over a greater than 200-fold concentration; however, there are significant differences among these agents with regard to the baseline activity, (29) and each [beta]-lactam is best considered as an independent agent with its own breakpoints based on its pharmacokinetics and dosing regimen. Susceptibility breakpoints and susceptibility of relevant [beta]-lactams at these breakpoints for usual dosing regimens by site of infection are shown in Tables I and II.
MIC distributions for other antimicrobial classes against which resistance has developed show distinct bimodal or trimodal patterns, with clear differentiation of 'wild-type' susceptible strains from resistant strains. Nonetheless, susceptibility breakpoints should be established based on PK/ PD parameters applicable to each agent and clinical studies to determine clinically relevant breakpoints. In most cases, the susceptible breakpoint falls between the susceptible 'wild-type' and resistant populations; susceptibilities of relevant agents at these breakpoints are shown in Tables I and II.
Macrolides show a trimodal MIC distribution, representing 'wild-type' strains with low MICs (<1 [micro]g/ml), strains with efflux-mediated resistance with MICs usually 1-8 [micro]g/ml for most macrolides, and strains with ribosomal methylase-mediated resistance with MICs usually >64 [micro]g/ml. (23) Strains with efflux-mediated resistance are susceptible to lincosamides, while those with ribosomal methylase-mediated resistance are not. Considerable effort has been expended on determining where the clinically relevant macrolide breakpoints lie. Many studies have shown that the breakpoint is between the MICs of the 'wild-type' and efflux-resistant populations in all pneumococcal diseases, including pneumonia, (15,30-33) so this should no longer be a point of controversy, although some investigators still disagree. (34) An agent related to macrolides, the ketolide telithromycin, is available in some countries, but its advantages, if any, over macrolides have not yet been adequately investigated. (35)
Unimodal MIC distributions are found for vancomycin, linezolid, doxycycline and rifampicin, with susceptible breakpoints above the MIC distributions of these agents with the exception of doxycycline, where the breakpoint falls within the MIC distribution. Fluoroquinolones with antipneumococcal activity (e.g. levofloxacin, moxifloxacin and gemifloxacin) are highly active against the majority of strains of S. pneumoniae; however, resistance has been found in many areas and is clinically significant. (36)
Treatment of S. pneumoniae infections
Empiric treatment of diseases associated with S. pneumoniae infections should take into account the spectrum of common pathogens, the probability of pneumococcal involvement, and the degree of drug resistance commonly found in the patient's geographical area.
The 2007 US treatment guidelines for empiric outpatient treatment of pneumonia in previously healthy adult patients without known risks for drug-resistant S. pneumoniae include a macrolide, such as azithromycin, clarithromycin, or erythromycin, or doxycycline. (37) In outpatients with comorbidities or immunosuppressing conditions, or use of antimicrobials within the previous 3 months, or in regions with >25% macrolide resistance, and for non-ICU inpatients, the guidelines suggest using a macrolide in combination with a [beta]-lactam, such as high-dose amoxicillin or amoxicillin clavulanate, preferentially, or cefpodoxime, cefuroxime or intramuscular (IM) ceftriaxone. Doxycycline may be used as an alternative to the macrolide. A respiratory fluoroquinolone, such as levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, or gemifloxacin, is also recommended as an alternative to a macrolide in combination with a [beta]-lactam, particularly for [beta]-lactam allergic patients. Guidelines in other regions generally recommend [beta]-lactams such as amoxicillin rather than macrolides as first-line agents. (38) High-dose amoxicillin, either alone or with the addition of clavulanate, is recommended for first-line outpatient treatment of children with moderate disease severity. (39) If oral antibiotics are not tolerated, daily IM ceftriaxone is recommended. Parenteral [beta]-lactam agents, including penicillin G, cefotaxime and ceftriaxone, are recommended for hospitalised children, provided that appropriate doses of these agents are used.
Initial empiric treatment of meningitis for patients older than 1 month is vancomycin plus a third-generation cephalosporin such as ceftriaxone or cefotaxime. (40) In patients over 50 years of age, ampicillin should be added to cover Listeria monocytogenes. Treatment can be adjusted once culture and susceptibility results are obtained. For fully penicillin G-susceptible strains (penicillin G MICs [less than or equal to] 0.06 [micro]g/ml), vancomycin can be discontinued, and treatment with cefotaxime or ceftriaxone continued, or high-dose penicillin G substituted. For strains with penicillin G MICs [greater than or equal to] 0.1 [micro]g/ml but susceptible to cefotaxime or ceftriaxone at their meningitis breakpoints ([less than or equal to] 0.5 [micro]g/ml), vancomycin may also be discontinued. For isolates not susceptible to cefotaxime or ceftriaxone, one should continue treatment with the cephalosporin plus vancomycin, and monitor bacteriological outcome by repeat lumbar puncture; rifampicin may be added, and moxifloxacin can be considered as an alternative. (40)
Acute otitis media (AOM)
Practice guidelines published by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians Subcommittee on Management of Acute Otitis Media recommend initial treatment with either amoxicillin 80-90 mg/kg/day or, in the case of high temperature (>39[degrees]C) or severe otalgia, amoxicillin/clavulanate 90/6.4 mg/kg/day. (19)
Fewer than 2% of cases of acute viral rhinitis are complicated by acute bacterial sinusitis. Consequently, most cases of sinusitis can be treated conservatively with fluids and decongestants. Symptoms lasting more than a week or increasing in severity can be indicative of bacterial superinfection, with S. pneumoniae the most common bacterial pathogen. Treatment guidelines suggest treating paediatric patients with mild disease and no antibiotic exposure in the previous 4-6 weeks, with high-dose amoxicillin-clavulanate, high-dose amoxicillin, cefpodoxime proxetil, cefuroxime axetil, or cefdinir. (20) Patients with [beta]-lactam hypersensitivity can be treated with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, azithromycin, clarithromycin, or erythromycin. Patients with more severe disease or recent antimicrobial use should be treated with high-dose amoxicillin-clavulanate, cefdinir, cefpodoxime or cefuroxime axetil. Beta-lactam-allergic patients should be treated as described above. Guidelines for adult patients are similar to those for paediatric patients, with the addition of respiratory fluoroquinolones such as levofloxacin or moxifloxacin, for treatment of more severe disease or treatment failure. (20)
Acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB)
About 50% of acute episodes are estimated to be caused by bacteria, predominantly Haemophilus influenzae, with S. pneumoniae the next most frequent pathogen. (41) More seriously ill patients, such as those with comorbidities or decreased respiratory function, or patients aged >65, are best treated with either high-dose amoxicillin-clavulanate or a respiratory fluoroquinolone. (42)
Despite years of increasing in vitro penicillin G resistance in the pneumococcus, there are few cases of treatment failure of non-meningeal infections with high-dose parenteral penicillin G. (43-46) The new CLSI breakpoints for parenteral penicillin G of susceptible ([less than or equal to] 2 [micro]g/ml), intermediate (4 [micro]g/ml), and resistant ([greater than or equal to] 8 [micro]g/ml) reflected in the 2008 guidelines will greatly facilitate appropriate reporting and use of penicillin G. For meningitis and oral use, the old breakpoints of susceptible ([less than or equal to] 0.06 [micro] g/ml), intermediate (0.12-1 [micro]g/ml), and resistant ([greater than or equal to] 2 [micro]g/ml) remain in place for penicillin G and penicillin V. Susceptibility breakpoints have now been developed for virtually all relevant antimicrobial agents used to treat pneumococcal diseases, and application of PK/PD parameters has been of great assistance in the development of these breakpoints. Although pneumococcal resistance to [beta]-lactams, macrolides and co-trimoxazole is now common worldwide, we are still able to treat almost all pneumococcal infections adequately. One exception is oral treatment of children with infections caused by resistant serotype 19A strains--the same resistant serotype found in South Africa in 1977, although of different clonal origin. (47) Resistant serotype 19A strains are now common in the USA following introduction of a conjugate vaccine for use in children that contains serotype 19F but not 19A polysaccharide; these strains are resistant to oral [beta]-lactams including amoxicillin, as well as to macrolides, lincosamides and co-trimoxazole. While there is a need to develop new agents, judicious use of antimicrobial agents is the best long-term approach. Empiric treatment guidelines should continue to evolve to reflect the emerging threats from increased drug resistance and the possibility of increased virulence in replacement serotypes. It has been encouraging to note the increased use of watchful waiting in initial treatment guidelines. Compliance with guidelines by physicians and patients is important to prevent further development of resistance.
I am honoured to participate in this tribute to Hendrik Koornhof, my teacher, mentor, collaborator and colleague. This review is also dedicated to the memory of Robert Austrian, whose passion for the pneumococcus stimulated my interest in this organism, and whose recent passing marked the end of an era. I would also like to acknowledge the numerous individuals with whom I have collaborated on pneumococcal projects throughout the world; lack of space and memory lapses preclude me from naming you all. It is particularly gratifying for me that the initial investigation of the multiply resistant pneumococcal outbreak in which I participated in 1977-1978 has stood the test of time, and that the susceptibility methods and interpretations developed have been validated and have formed the basis of testing and interpretation currently in use worldwide.
I wish to acknowledge and thank the following for their assistance and support:
Research grants: Abbott Pharmaceuticals, ARPIDA Pharmaceuticals, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Basilea Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Pharmaceuticals, Dr Reddy's Laboratory, Eli Lilly & Co, GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals, Meiji Pharmaceuticals, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Pfizer Inc, Rambaxy Laboratories, Roche Pharmaceuticals, TAP Pharmaceuticals, Warner-Lambert Pharmaceuticals, Wockhardt Pharmaceuticals, Wyeth Ayerst/ Lederle Pharmaceuticals.
Consultation: Abbott Pharmaceuticals, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, GeneSoft Pharmaceuticals, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Sano-Aventis Pharmaceuticals, TAP Pharmaceuticals, Wockhardt Pharmaceuticals, Wyeth Ayerst/ Lederle Pharmaceuticals.
Speakers' bureau: Bayer Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical.
(1.) Dagan R, Greenberg D, Jacobs MR. Streptococcus pneumoniae. In: Feigin RD, Cherry JD, Demmler GJ, Kaplan SL, eds. Textbook of Pediatric Infectious Disease. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 2004: 1204-1258.
(2.) Jacobs MR. Drug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae: rational antibiotic choices. Am J Med 1999; 106(5A): 19S-25S; discussion 48S-52S.
(3.) Rudan I, Tomaskovic L, Boschi-Pinto C, Campbell H. Global estimate of the incidence of clinical pneumonia among children under five years of age. Bull World Health Organ 2004; 82(12): 895-903.
(4.) Centers for Disease Control. Active Bacterial Core Surveillance (ABCS) Report Emerging Infections Program Network Streptococcus pneumoniae, 2005. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/ dbmd/abcs/survreports/spneu05.pdf. 2006. Accessed 6 July 2007.
(5.) Ekdahl K, Ahlinder I, Hansson HB, et al. Duration of nasopharyngeal carriage of penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae: experiences from the South Swedish Pneumococcal Intervention Project. Clin Infect Dis 1997; 25(5): 1113-1117.
(6.) Hausdorff WP, Yothers G, Dagan R, et al. Multinational study of pneumococcal serotypes causing acute otitis media in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2002; 21(11): 1008-1016.
(7.) Fleming A. Vaccine Therapy. In: Fleming A, Petrie GF, eds. Recent Advances in Vaccine and Serum Therapy. London: J & A Churchill, 1934: 298-308.
(8.) Austrian R. Some observations on the pneumococcus and on the current status of pneumococcal disease and its prevention. Rev Infect Dis 1981; 3 Suppl: S1-17.
(9.) Watson DA, Musher DM, Jacobson JW, Verhoef J. A brief history of the pneumococcus in biomedical research: a panoply of scientific discovery. Clin Infect Dis 1993; 17(5): 913-924.
(10.) Robinson KA, Baughman W, Rothrock G, et al. Epidemiology of invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae infections in the United States, 1995-1998: Opportunities for prevention in the conjugate vaccine era. JAMA 2001; 285(13): 1729-1735.
(11.) Shields B. Prevnar (heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine): disease prevention in infants and children. J Pediatr Health Care 2001; 15(4): 203-208; quiz 209-210.
(12.) Whitney CG. Impact of conjugate pneumococcal vaccines. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2005; 24(8): 729730.
(13.) Pelton SI, Huot H, Finkelstein JA, et al. Emergence of 19A as virulent and multi-drug resistant Pneumococcus in Massachusetts following universal immunization of infants with pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2007; 26(6): 468-472.
(14.) Messina AF, Katz-Gaynor K, Barton T, et al. Impact of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on serotype distribution and antimicrobial resistance of invasive Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates in Dallas, Tex, children from 1999 through 2005. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2007; 26(6): 461-467.
(15.) Klugman KP. Clinical impact of antibiotic resistance in respiratory tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2007; 29 Suppl 1: S6-10.
(16.) Austrian R. The pneumococcus at the millennium: not down, not out. J Infect Dis 1999; 179 Suppl 2: S338-341.
(17.) Appelbaum PC, Bhamjee A, Scragg JN, Hallett AF, Bowen AJ, Cooper RC. Streptococcus pneumoniae resistant to penicillin and chloramphenicol. Lancet 1977; 2(8046): 995-997.
(18.) Jacobs MR, Koornhof HJ, Robins-Browne RM, et al. Emergence of multiply resistant pneumococci. N Engl J Med 1978; 299(14): 735-740.
(19.) American Academy of Pediatrics and American Academy of Family Physicians. Diagnosis and management of acute otitis media. Pediatrics 2004; 113(5): 1451-1465.
(20.) Anon JB, Jacobs MR, Poole MD, et al. Antimicrobial treatment guidelines for acute bacterial rhinosinusitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130(1 Suppl): 1-45.
(21.) Dagan R, Leibovitz E. Bacterial eradication in the treatment of otitis media. Lancet Infect Dis 2002; 2(10): 593-604.
(22.) Jacobs MR. Anti-infective pharmacodynamics--maximizing efficacy, minimizing toxicity. Drug Discovery Today 2004; 1(4): 505-512.
(23.) Jacobs MR, Anon J, Appelbaum PC. Mechanisms of resistance among respiratory tract pathogens. Clin Lab Med 2004; 24(2): 419-453.
(24.) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; 18th Informational Supplement. M100-S18. Wayne, Pa.: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2008.
(25.) Johnson DM, Stilwell MG, Fritsche TR, Jones RN. Emergence of multidrug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae: report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (1999-2003). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2006; 56(1): 69-74.
(26.) Song JH, Ko KS, Lee MY, et al. In vitro activities of ertapenem against drug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae and other respiratory pathogens from 12 Asian countries. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2006; 56(4): 445-450.
(27.) Jacobs MR, Felmingham D, Appelbaum PC, Gruneberg RN. The Alexander Project 1998-2000: susceptibility of pathogens isolated from community-acquired respiratory tract infection to commonly used antimicrobial agents. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003; 52(2): 229-246.
(28.) Schrag SJ, McGee L, Whitney CG, et al. Emergence of Streptococcus pneumoniae with very-high-level resistance to penicillin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48(8): 3016-3023.
(29.) Jacobs MR. Increasing antibiotic resistance among otitis media pathogens and their susceptibility to oral agents based on pharmacodynamic parameters. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2000; 19(5 Suppl): S47-55; discussion S55-56.
(30.) Schentag JJ, Klugman KP, Yu VL, et al. Streptococcus pneumoniae bacteraemia: pharmacodynamic correlations with outcome and macrolide resistance--a controlled study. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2007; 30(3): 264-269.
(31.) Daneman N, McGeer A, Green K, Low DE. Macrolide resistance in bacteremic pneumococcal disease: implications for patient management. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 43(4): 432-438.
(32.) Lonks JR, Garau J, Gomez L, et al. Failure of macrolide antibiotic treatment in patients with bacteremia due to erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 35(5): 556-564.
(33.) Jacobs MR. In vivo veritas: in vitro macrolide resistance in systemic Streptococcus pneumoniae infections does result in clinical failure. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 35(5): 565-569.
(34.) Hoban DJ, Zhanel GG. Clinical implications of macrolide resistance in community-acquired respiratory tract infections. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2006; 4(6): 973-980.
(35.) Gleason PP, Walters C, Heaton AH, Schafer JA. Telithromycin: the perils of hasty adoption and persistence of off-label prescribing. J Manag Care Pharm 2007; 13(5): 420-425.
(36.) Fuller JD, Low DE. A review of Streptococcus pneumoniae infection treatment failures associated with fluoroquinolone resistance. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41(1): 118-121.
(37.) Mandell LA, Wunderink RG, Anzueto A, et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America/ American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44 Suppl 2: S27-72.
(38.) Lode HM. Managing community-acquired pneumonia: A European perspective. Respir Med 2007; 101: 1864-1873.
(39.) Bradley JS. Management of community-acquired pediatric pneumonia in an era of increasing antibiotic resistance and conjugate vaccines. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2002; 21(6): 592-598; discussion 613-614.
(40.) Tunkel AR, Hartman BJ, Kaplan SL, et al. Practice guidelines for the management of bacterial meningitis. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39(9): 1267-1284.
(41.) Sethi S, Murphy TF. Acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: new developments concerning microbiology and pathophysiology--impact on approaches to risk stratification and therapy. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2004; 18(4): 861-882, ix.
(42.) Brunton S, Carmichael BP, Colgan R, et al. Acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis: a primary care consensus guideline. Am J Manag Care 2004; 10(10): 689-696.
(43.) Peterson LR. Penicillins for treatment of pneumococcal pneumonia: does in vitro resistance really matter? Clin Infect Dis 2006; 42(2): 224-233.
(44.) Klugman KP, Yu VL. No impact of penicillin resistance on mortality. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 43(2): 261-262.
(45.) Chiou CC. Does penicillin remain the drug of choice for pneumococcal pneumonia in view of emerging in vitro resistance? Clin Infect Dis 2006; 42(2): 234-237.
(46.) Yu VL, Chiou CC, Feldman C, et al. An international prospective study of pneumococcal bacteremia: correlation with in vitro resistance, antibiotics administered, and clinical outcome. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 37(2): 230-237.
(47.) Reinert RR, Jacobs MR, Appelbaum PC, et al. Relationship between the original multiply resistant South African isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae from 1977 to 1978 and contemporary international resistant clones. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43(12): 6035-6041.
(48.) American Academy of Pediatrics. Section 3. Summaries of Infectious Diseases. Pneumococcal Infections. Red Book Online http://aapredbook.aappublications.org/cgi/ content/full/2006/1/3.100#T3.47 2006. Accessed 6 July 2007.
(49.) Jacobs MR. Optimisation of antimicrobial therapy using pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters. Clin Microbiol Infect 2001; 7(11): 589-596.
(50.) Jones RN, Mutnick AH, Varnam DJ. Impact of modified nonmeningeal Streptococcus pneumoniae interpretive criteria (NCCLS M100-S12) on the susceptibility patterns of five parenteral cephalosporins: report from the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program (1997 to 2001). J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40(11): 4332-4333.
(51.) Pfaller MA, Jones RN. A review of the in vitro activity of meropenem and comparative antimicrobial agents tested against 30,254 aerobic and anaerobic pathogens isolated world wide. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1997; 28(4): 157-163.
(52.) Fritsche TR, Stilwell MG, Jones RN. Antimicrobial activity of doripenem (S-4661): a global surveillance report (2003). Clin Microbiol Infect 2005; 11(12): 974-984.
(53.) Jones RN, Ross JE, Fritsche TR, Sader HS. Oxazolidinone susceptibility patterns in 2004: report from the Zyvox Annual Appraisal of Potency and Spectrum (ZAAPS) Program assessing isolates from 16 nations. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006; 57(2): 279-287.
(54.) Marchese A, Gualco L, Schito AM, Debbia EA, Schito GC. In vitro activity of ertapenem against selected respiratory pathogens. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 54(5): 944-951.
Department of Pathology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Michael R Jacobs, MB BCh, PhD, MRCPath, FFPath (SA)
Table I. Susceptibility of S. pneunoniae to selected antimicrobials using CLSI breakpoints except for doxycycline and high-dose and extended-release amoxicillin/clavulanate, for which PK/PD breakpoints were used * Per cent susceptibility Susceptible by region Antimicrobial breakpoint agent ([micro]g/ml) Africa E. Europe Parenteral agents Penicillin G [less than or 47.8 85.4 parenteral equal to] 0.06 (meningitis, high dose) Penicillin G [less than or Parenteral equal to] 2 94.4 96.4 (non-meningitis, regular dose) Penicillin G [less than or parenteral equal to] 4 100.0 100.0 (non-meningitis, high dose) Ceftriaxone [less than or 96.1 96.2 (non-meningitis) equal to] 1 Ceftriaxone [less than or 91.1 92.0 (meningitis) equal to] 0.5 Oral agents Penicillin V [less than or equal to] 0.06 47.8 85.4 Amoxicillin [less than or (regular dose) equal to] 2 96.3 98.3 Amoxicillin/ [less than or clavulanate equal to] 2 97.6 98.5 (regular dose) Amoxicillin [less than or (high dose) equal to] 4 99.8 919.1 Amoxicillin/ [less than or clavulanate equal to] 4 99.8 99.1 (high dose and extended release) Cefaclor [less than or equal to] 0.5 589.0 83.8 Cefuroxime [less than or axetil equal to] 1 88.9 91.0 Cefixime [less than or equal to] 1 47.8 85.4 Cefprozil [less than or equal to] 1 89.8 91.6 Cefdinir [less than or equal to] 0.5 87.2 911.8 Doxycycline [less than or equal to] 0.25 67.4 71.6 Co-trimoxazole [less than or equal to] 0.5/9.5 44.3 68.2 Oral and parenteral agents Erythromycin [less than or equal to] 0.25 90.0 93.0 Clarithromycin [less than or equal to] 0.25 90.0 93.2 Azithromycin [less than or equal to] 0.12 90.0 93.0 Clindamycin [less than or equal to] 0.25 91.1 95.0 Chloramphenicol [less than or equal to] 4 90.6 86.9 Levofloxacin [less than or equal to] 2 99.8 99.9 Gemiflloxacin [less than or equal to] 0.25 100 100 Moxifloxacin [less than or equal to] 1 100 100 Per cent susceptibility by region Antimicrobial Middle agent W. Europe Far East East Parenteral agents Penicillin G 77.8 45.3 45.5 parenteral (meningitis, high dose) Penicillin G Parenteral 95.3 80.0 88.5 (non-meningitis, regular dose) Penicillin G parenteral 99.8 99.0 100.0 (non-meningitis, high dose) Ceftriaxone 96.0 86.2 91.7 (non-meningitis) Ceftriaxone 86.6 6.0 74.5 (meningitis) Oral agents Penicillin V 77.8 45.3 45.5 Amoxicillin (regular dose) 97.2 93.0 952.0 Amoxicillin/ clavulanate 97.5 93.3 95.5 (regular dose) Amoxicillin (high dose) 99.0 99.5 99.4 Amoxicillin/ clavulanate 99.0 99.5 99.4 (high dose and extended release) Cefaclor 72.6 22.2 39.5 Cefuroxime axetil 84.3 54.0 71.0 Cefixime 77.8 45.3 45.5 Cefprozil 85.3 54.5 68.8 Cefdinir 81.8 50.6 64.4 Doxycycline 76.1 24.8 77.4 Co-trimoxazole 71.3 51.5 50.3 Oral and parenteral agents Erythromycin 77.6 32.7 82.5 Clarithromycin 77.6 32.9 82.8 Azithromycin 77.6 32.7 83.1 Clindamycin 81.6 68.8 93.1 Chloramphenicol 89.9 63.2 94.3 Levofloxacin 99.8 94.9 99.7 Gemiflloxacin 100 99.6 100 Moxifloxacin 99.9 97.4 100 Per cent susceptibility by region Per cent Antimicrobial Latin susceptibility, agent America USA all isolates Parenteral agents Penicillin G 63.4 62.9 68.3 parenteral (meningitis, high dose) Penicillin G Parenteral 97.0 90.2 92.6 (non-meningitis, regular dose) Penicillin G parenteral 99.8 99.4 99.7 (non-meningitis, high dose) Ceftriaxone 98.8 95.7 95.1 (non-meningitis) Ceftriaxone 88.6 77.8 82.6 (meningitis) Oral agents Penicillin V 63.4 62.9 68.3 Amoxicillin (regular dose) 96.3 90.9 95.1 Amoxicillin/ clavulanate 96.5 91.6 95.5 (regular dose) Amoxicillin (high dose) 98.6 94.7 97.9 Amoxicillin/ clavulanate 98.6 94.7 97.9 (high dose and extended release) Cefaclor 67.6 45.6 60.2 Cefuroxime axetil 80.9 70.9 78.6 Cefixime 63.4 629.0 68.3 Cefprozil 83.7 72.7 79.7 Cefdinir 77.3 70.0 76.5 Doxycycline 70.4 79.0 71.3 Co-trimoxazole 46.4 62.5 63.3 Oral and parenteral agents Erythromycin 84.1 71.2 75.3 Clarithromycin 84.6 71.6 75.5 Azithromycin 84.1 71.3 75.4 Clindamycin 90.2 90.3 86.1 Chloramphenicol 94.2 91.3 88.1 Levofloxacin 99.5 99.1 99.2 Gemiflloxacin 99.8 99.7 99.9 Moxifloxacin 100 99.4 99.6 * Data adapted front the Alexander Project, 1998-2000, (27) with application of new penicillin G breakpoint, (24) Table II. Adult and paediatric dosing regimens and susceptibility of antimicrobial agents used to treat pneumococcal infections. (19,20,37,40,48,49) Dosing regimens are shown as total recommended daily dose and number of doses per day, and should be used in conjunction with local prescribing information. Susceptibility data reflect overall findings from international studies and local susceptibility data should be taken into consideration as susceptibility patterns vary considerably Total daily dose (number of doses per day) Antimicrobial Adults Infants and children agent Parenteral agents-meningitis Penicillin G 24 million units (6) 300 000 - 400 000 U/kg (4 - 6) Ampicillin 12 g (6) 300 mg/kg (4) Ceftriaxone 4 g (1 - 2) 100 mg/kg (7 - 2) Cefotaxfime 8 - 12 g (4 - 6) 225 - 300mg/kg (4 - 6) Cefepime 6 g (3) 1,90 mg/kg (3) Meropenem 6 g (3) 120 mg/kg (3) Vancomycin 30 - 60 mg/kg (3 - 4) 60 mg/kg (4) Rifampicin 600 mg (1) 20 mg (1 - 2) Chloramphenicol 4 - 6 g (4) 75 - 100 mg/kg (4) Parenteral agents-- non-meningeal infections Penicillin G 12 million units (6) 250 000 - 400 000 U/kg (regular dose) (4 - 6) Penicillin G 18 - 24 million unit, 400 000 U/kg (4 - 6) (high dose) (6) Ampicillin 4 - 8 g (4) 50 - 100 mg/kg (4) Ceftriaxone 1 - 2 g (1) 50 - 75 mg/kg (1 - 2) Cefotaxime 3 g (3) 75 - 100 mg/kg (3 - 4) Cefriroxime 2.25 g (3) 50 - 100 mg/kg (3 -4) sodium Cefepime 2g (2) 100 mg/kg (2) Meropenem 1.5 - 3 g (3) 60 - 120 mg/kg (3) Imipenem 1 - 2 g (3 - 4) 60 mg/kg (4) Ertapenem 1 g (1) 30 mg/kg (2) Vancomycin 2 g (2 - 4) 40 - 45 mg/kg (3 - 4) Oral agents Penicillin V l - 2 g (3 - 4) 25 - 50 mg/kg (3 - 4) Amoxicillin 1.5 g (2 - 3) 45 mg/kg (2 - 3) (regular dose) Amoxicillin/ 45/6.4mg/kg (2-3) clavulanate (regular dose) Amoxicillin 6 (3) 90 mg/kg (2 - 3) (high dose) Amoxicillin/ 4 g/250 mg extended 90/6.4 mg/kg (2-3) clavulanate release (2) (high dose and extended release) Cefaclor 750 - 1 500 mg (3) 20 - 40 mg/kg (3) Cefuroxime 300 - 1 000 mg (2) 20 - 30 mg/kg (2) axetil Cefixime 400 mg (1 - 2) 8 mg/kg (1 - 2) Cefprozil 500 - 1 000 mg (2) 15-30 mg/kg (2) Cefdinir 600 mg (1 - 2) 14 mg /kg (l - 2) Doxycycline 200 mg day 1, then 100 NR ([double dagger]) mg (1) Co-trimoxazole 320 / 1 600 mg (2) 8/40 mg/kg (2) Oral and parenteral agents Levofloxacin 500 - 750 (1) NR ([double dagger]) Gemifloxacin 320 (1) NR ([double dagger]) Moxifloxacin 400 (1) NR ([double dagger]) Erythromycin 1 - 2 g (4) 30 - 50 mg/kg (4) Clarithromycin 500 - 750 mg (1 - 2) 15 mg /kg (2) Azithromycin 500 mg day 1, then 10 mg/kg day 1, then 250 - 500 mg (1) 5 - 10 mg/kg (1) Clindamycin 600 - 1 200 mg (4) 8 - 16 mg/kg (4) Linezolid 1 200 mg (2) 30 mg/kg (3) Susceptible breakpoint Per cent Antimicrobial ([micro]g/ml) * susceptibility agent Parenteral agents-meningitis Penicillin G [less than or equal 68.3 to] 0.06 Ampicillin Penicillin [less than 68.3 or equal to] 0.06 Ceftriaxone [less than or equal 82.2 - 86.2 to] 0.5 Cefotaxfime [less than or equal 87.4 to] 0.5 Cefepime [less than or equal 85.3 to] 0.5 Meropenem [less than or equal 78.1 - 93.9 to] 0.25 Vancomycin [less than or equal 100 to] 1 Rifampicin [less than or equal 99.9 to] 1 Chloramphenicol [less than or equal 88.1 to] 4 Parenteral agents-- non-meningeal infections Penicillin G [less than or equal 92.6 (regular dose) to] 2 ([dagger]) Penicillin G [less than or equal 99.7 ([section]) (high dose) to] 4 Ampicillin Penicillin [less than 92.6 or equal to] 2 Ceftriaxone [less than or equal 95.2 to] l Cefotaxime [less than or equal 95.1 - 96.5 to] l Cefriroxime [less than or equal 75.3 sodium to] 0.5 Cefepime [less than or equal 96.5 to] l Meropenem [less than or equal 78.1 - 93.9 to] 0.25 Imipenem [less than or equal 92.4 - 96.3 to] 0.12 Ertapenem [less than or equal 93.2 - 93.3 to] l Vancomycin [less than or equal 100 to] l Oral agents Penicillin V Penicillin [less than 68.3 or equal to] 0.06 ([dagger]) Amoxicillin [less than or equal 95.1 (regular dose) to] 2 Amoxicillin/ [less than or equal 95.5 clavulanate to] 2 (regular dose) Amoxicillin [less than or equal 97.9 (high dose) to] 4 Amoxicillin/ [less than or equal 97.9 clavulanate to] 4 (high dose and extended release) Cefaclor [less than or equal 60.2 to] 0.5 Cefuroxime [less than or equal 78.6 axetil to] l Cefixime [less than or equal 68.3 to] l Cefprozil [less than or equal 79.7 to] l Cefdinir [less than or equal 76.5 to] 0.5 Doxycycline [less than or equal 71.3 to] 0.25 Co-trimoxazole [less than or equal 63.3 to] 0.5/9.5 Oral and parenteral agents Levofloxacin [less than or equal 99.2 to] 2 Gemifloxacin [less than or equal 99.9 to] 0.25 Moxifloxacin [less than or equal 99.6 to] 1 Erythromycin [less than or equal 75.3 to] 0.25 Clarithromycin [less than or equal 75.5 to] 0.25 Azithromycin [less than or equal 75.4 to] 0.12 Clindamycin [less than or equal 86 to] 0.25 Linezolid [less than or equal 100 to] 2 Antimicrobial Data source agent Parenteral agents-meningitis Penicillin G 27 Ampicillin 27 Ceftriaxone 27, 50 Cefotaxfime 50 Cefepime 50 Meropenem 51 Vancomycin 52 Rifampicin 53 Chloramphenicol 27 Parenteral agents-- non-meningeal infections Penicillin G 27 (regular dose) Penicillin G 27 (high dose) Ampicillin 27 Ceftriaxone 50 Cefotaxime 27, 50 Cefriroxime 50 sodium Cefepime 50 Meropenem 51 Imipenem 51 Ertapenem 26, 54 Vancomycin 52 Oral agents Penicillin V 27 Amoxicillin 27 (regular dose) Amoxicillin/ 27 clavulanate (regular dose) Amoxicillin 27 (high dose) Amoxicillin/ 27 clavulanate (high dose and extended release) Cefaclor 27 Cefuroxime 27 axetil Cefixime 27 Cefprozil 27 Cefdinir 27 Doxycycline 27 Co-trimoxazole 27 Oral and parenteral agents Levofloxacin 27 Gemifloxacin 27 Moxifloxacin 27 Erythromycin 27 Clarithromycin 27 Azithromycin 27 Clindamycin 27 Linezolid 50 * Susceptibility breakpoint for agent shown unless specified otherwise. ([dagger]) Non-meningeal isolates susceptible to Penicillin G at this breakpoint can be considered susceptible to prenteral ampicillin, cefepime, cefotaxime and ceftriaxone. Non-meningeal isolates susceptible to s0.06 [micro]g; ml of penicillin G can also be considered susceptible to these parenteral agents, as well as to parenteral ertapenem, imipenem and meropenem and to oral ampicillin, amoxicillin, amoxicillin/clavulanate, cefader, cefdinir, cefditoren, cefprozil, cefuroxime and cefpodoxime. ([double dagger]) NR = not recommended for use in infants and children. ([section]) Include, penicillin G susceptible (92.6%) and intermediate (7.1%) isolates based on new, non-meningeal, arenteral penicillin G susceptibility breakpoints. (24)
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||Original Articles|
|Author:||Jacobs, Michael R.|
|Publication:||South African Medical Journal|
|Article Type:||Clinical report|
|Date:||Nov 1, 2007|
|Previous Article:||Risk factors for antibiotic resistance in Streptococcus pneumoniae.|
|Next Article:||A pivotal role for pneumolysin in the immunopathogenesis, treatment and prevention of pneumococcal disease.|