Abstract
Mycobacterium abscessus species (MABS) is the most commonly isolated rapidly growing mycobacteria (RGM) and is one of the most antibiotic-resistant RGM with rapid progression, therefore, treatment of MABS is still challenging. We here presented a new combination treatment with sitafloxacin that targeted rough morphotypes of MABS, causing aggressive infections. Thirty-four clinical strains of MABS were isolated from various clinical samples at the Juntendo university hospital from 2011 to 2020. The susceptibility to a combination of sitafloxacin and antimicrobial agents was compared to that of the antimicrobial agents alone. Out of 34 MABS, 8 strains treated with sitafloxacin–amikacin combination, 9 of sitafloxacin–imipenem combination, 19 of sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination, and 9 of sitafloxacin–clarithromycin combination showed synergistic effects, respectively. Sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination also exhibited the synergistic effects against 10 of 22 Mycobacterium abscessus subspecies massiliense (Mma) strains and 8 of 11 Mycobacterium abscessus subspecies abscessus (Mab) strains, a highly resistant subspecies of MABS. The sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination revealed more synergistic effects in rough morphotypes of MABS (p = 0.008). We demonstrated the synergistic effect of the sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination against MABS. Further, this combination regimen might be more effective against Mab or rough morphotypes of MABS.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) are environmental pathogens that can cause diverse types of infectious diseases in humans. NTM are classified into RGM where colony formation requires less than seven days and slowly growing mycobacteria (SGM) forming colonies at least seven days. MABS is the most commonly isolated RGM and the third most common cause of respiratory NTM in the United States1. Pulmonary disease caused by MABS mostly occur in the setting of structural lung conditions. Most of the patients underlying disease in Japan were bronchiectasis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), previous pulmonary tuberculosis; whereas, that in North America and Europe was cystic fibrosis (CF)2,3,4. These infections are often incurable and associated with rapid lung function decline5,6. New NTM treatment guidelines were published in 20207. The guidelines introduced new treatment options, including inhaled amikacin, tigecycline, and clofazimine8,9,10; however, the treatment benefits were limited to negative culture conversion of sputum. Recently, the efficacy of sitafloxacin, a fluoroquinolone developed in Japan, containing regimens against MABS have been reported11,12. Sitafloxacin, with a chloro substituent at the C-8 position, is a newly developed oral quinoline, exhibiting good antimicrobial activity against extracellular and intramacrophage Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) compared to levofloxacin in vitro and in vivo13,14,15,16. These previous papers suggest that fluoroquinolone combining regimens could have a potency for the effective treatment of MABS. Genus mycobacterium included Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis), and some NTM have long been known to have both rough and smooth colony morphotypes17,18. These morphotypes are formed by the expression levels of glycopeptidolipids (GPLs). GPLs are produced by several NTMs, including RGMs (M. abscessus, M. chelonae, and M. smegmatis)19,20,21 and MAC members22,23,24. MABS can spontaneously change between a smooth form, which expresses GPLs, and a rough form, lacking GPLs. The smooth form can form biofilms and colonize surfaces; conversely, the rough morphotypes cannot form biofilms but can multiply in macrophages and cause persistent infection25. Rough morphotypes are generally more virulent than smooth variants for isolates lacking GPLs enhanced releasing TNF-α from macrophage25,26,27. Conversely, to form biofilms, smooth variants were related to protecting from surrounding factors28. Here, we presented the new sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination regimens, which are more effective on rough morphotypes, causing aggressive infections, and could be a potential treatment option against Mab.
Results
Thirty-four clinical strains of MABS were isolated from various clinical samples at the Juntendo university hospital from 2011 to 2020. The characteristics of patients isolated from MABS are shown in Table 1. Methods of incubation time and susceptibility testing were used as a reference to our previous report29. Five antimicrobials (clarithromycin, intravenous amikacin, imipenem, arbekacin, and sitafloxacin) were used for the study. The difference of MICs between both colony morphotypes was evaluated (Fig. 1), and MICs of sitafloxacin and intravenous amikacin in rough morphotypes were significantly lower than smooth morphotypes (p values of sitafloxacin and intravenous amikacin were 0.0004 and 0.002, respectively). Therefore, we investigated the best combination partners of sitafloxacin as the potential regimens for MABS especially rough morphotypes. The susceptibility to a combination of sitafloxacin and antimicrobial agents was compared to that of the antimicrobial agents alone, categorized into each subspecies of MABS (Fig. 2). The MICs of four antimicrobial agents (clarithromycin, intravenous amikacin, imipenem, and arbekacin) were measured with or without sitafloxacin. Ten of 11 Mab were susceptible to sitafloxacin in the combination administration; while, 11 of 22 Mma were susceptible. The median MICs of sitafloxacin and arbekacin in MABS were significantly lower in the combination administration (p values of sitafloxacin and intravenous amikacin were < 0.001 and 0.028, respectively, Table S2). We next evaluated the most synergistic combinations by using the fractional inhibitory concentration (FIC) index as described in previous paper30. Figure 3 showed the relation between FIC of sitafloxacin and that of the other antibiotics. The combination of sitafloxacin and amikacin tended to be obviously higher rate of synergy and additive effect. Further evaluation of FIC index of each combination was performed (Fig. 4 and Table 2). Susceptibility was divided into two classes, synergy and additive as a synergistic effect and indifference and antagonism as an antagonistic effect. Out of 34 MABS, 8 strains treated with sitafloxacin–amikacin combination, 9 of sitafloxacin–imipenem combination, 19 of sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination, and 9 of sitafloxacin–clarithromycin combination showed synergistic effects, respectively. Sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination also exhibited the synergistic effects against 10 of 22 Mma strains and 8 of 11 Mab strains, a highly resistant subspecies of MABS. We investigated whether susceptibility to the sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination might associate with clinical or isolate status. The rough colony morphotypes revealed more synergistic effects than antagonistic effects (p = 0.008) (Table 3). The other clinical parameters such as age, sex, smoking history, bronchiectasis lesion, and treatment history of antibiotics did not influence the sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination.
Discussion
We demonstrated here the efficacy of the new sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination regimen. The combination addministration revealed MIC reduction of sitafloxacin and arbekacin, and significantly high synergistic effect against MABS. The combination regimen showed a higher rate of susceptibility and synergistic effects against Mab than all other combinations. Interestingly, the combination had relatively higher efficacy in Mma than others including clarithromycin–arbekacin combination, even though clarithromycin is the key drug of Mma treatment. These results might suggest that the combination therapy was more effective against Mab, showing a high level of antimicrobial resistance. Furthermore, the combination revealed higher efficacy for the treatment of MABS in rough morphotypes associated with aggressive infections.
Sitafloxacin is approved in Japan, and it has been clinically used against most NTM infections. Formerly, sitafloxacin has been mainly used for MAC infections among NTMs; then, in vitro studies and clinical use for MABS has increased. Bedaquiline-clofazimine-sitafloxacin combination revealed a synergistic effect against 11 isolates of 70 Mab (15.7%)11. In a Japanese retrospective study of 13 MABS pulmonary disease, all 4 patients who received sitafloxacin-containing regimens achieved negative sputum conversion after 1 year of treatment and improved radiological findings12. Japanese case series described that five cases of pulmonary MABS were successfully treated with clarithromycin and sitafloxacin combination31. Together with our data and previous reports, sitafloxacin could be an effective antimicrobial combination partner against refractory MABS. MABS exist in two distinct morphotypes, smooth and rough, that differ in their gross colony appearances when grown on solid media due to their differing amounts of cell wall GPLs. The smooth morphotype initially colonizes the airway mucosa, and had generally lower pathogenicity in this state. Subsequently switching from smooth morphotypes to rough morphotypes, aggressive pulmonary disease cause. Smooth morphotypes have an advantage in survival due to biofilm formation, leading to inhibit bacteria-induced apoptosis32. Conversely, rough morphotypes, without biofilms, induce the invasion ability mediated by apoptotic cell death33,34. Several clinical data have revealed increased pathogenicity from the rough morphotype. The rates of isolation of rough morphotype is higher in the CF patients with clinical symptoms35, and case reports describe that the CF patients with rough morphotypes lead to dramatic declines of respiratory function and/or death26,36. Thus, the development of new treatment targeted rough morphotypes has become imperative. Our study revealed that sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination had the higher synergy in rough morphotypes, the combination could be useful treatment for the patients who are isolated with rough morphotypes and/or whose disease have progressed. Interestingly, in 17 out of 19 smooth morphotypes, sitafloxacin susceptibility in the combination treatment improved as compared to alone. This data suggested that sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination could be also partially effective as the treatment for smooth morphotypes of MABS. In conclusion, our in vitro study demonstrated the synergistic effect of the sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination against MABS. Further, this combination regimen might be more effective against not only rough morphotype of MABS, causing severe disease, but also Mab, which is thought to reveal high resistance to antibiotics. The limitation of our study is that the sample size was limited to make definitive concerns and the clinical efficacy of the sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination have not been assessed. Further studies are required to clarify the validity of the combination.
Materials and methods
Determination of MABS
Three subspecies of MABS was confirmed by sequencing the 16S rRNA, rpoB, hsp65, and erm genes37,38. All strains of MABS were cultured on BD trypticase soy agar II with 5% sheep blood (Blood agar; Nippon Becton–Dickinson and Company, Japan) at 35 °C for approximately 4 to 6 days to observe colony morphology and purity and then used for species identification based on multi-locus sequence analysis. Colony morphologies were confirmed before the drug sensitivity testing, and all strains grew to maintain the same colony morphologies even after repeat-passage.
Methodological details are described in the Supplementary Materials and Methods.
PCR amplification, DNA sequencing, and MALDI–TOF MS analysis
The conditions of each analysis and primer sequences used in PCR to detect transcripts are described in the Supplementary materials and methods.
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing
Susceptibility testing was performed according to Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) guideline M24-A235. The bacterial suspension was diluted at a concentration of 1–5 × 105 colony forming units (CFU)/mL in cation-adjusted Mueller–Hinton broth (CAMHB), then the final suspension was inoculated on the break-point checkerboard plate customized for the study (Eiken Chemical Co., Ltd., Japan). The ranges of antibiotic concentrations tested were as follows: clarithromycin (CLR) 0.06 to 64 μg/mL, arbekacin (ABK) 1 to 8 μg/mL, intravenous amikacin (AMK) 1 to 64 μg/mL, imipenem (IPM) 2 to 32 μg/mL, and sitafloxacin (STFX) 0.12 to 32 μg/mL. MICs of each antimicrobial agent were determined by broth microdilution methods as recommended by the CLSI. The panels were prepared with a 96-channel dispenser and stored at −80 °C until use. Sitafloxacin were dispensed alone in the first row, and arbekacin, intravenous amikacin, imipenem were dispensed in the first column. Each well was inoculated with a concentration of 1 × 105 colony-forming units (CFU)/mL. The MICs were determined after 7 days of incubation at 35 °C. The MIC breakpoints, indicating susceptible, intermediate, and resistant strains, were interpreted according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) criteria (Table 4)39. Sitafloxasin and arbekacin breakpoints were undefined. The effect of each agent combined with sitafloxacin was evaluated using FIC index analysis30.
Statistical analysis
Categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. The evaluation of changes in MIC was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Differences were considered significant at p < 0.05. When the chi-square test results were statistically significant, adjusted residuals were calculated to determine which particular associations were significant. Adjusted residuals were significant at p < 0.05 level if they were less than − 1.96 or more than 1.96 and were significant at p < 0.01 level if they were less than − 2.58 or more than 2.58. All statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS software program (version 20, IBM Japan, Japan).
Data availability
The datasets used in the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Abbreviations
- MABS:
-
Mycobacterium abscessus Species
- NTM:
-
Nontuberculous mycobacteria
- RGM:
-
Rapidly growing mycobacteria
- SGM:
-
Slowly growing mycobacteria
- Mma:
-
Mycobacterium abscessus Subspecies massiliense
- Mab:
-
Mycobacterium abscessus Subspecies abscessus
- Mbo:
-
Mycobacterium abscessus Subspecies bolletii
- M. tuberculosis :
-
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
- COPD:
-
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
- CF:
-
Cystic fibrosis
- GPL:
-
Glycopeptidolipid
- MAC:
-
Mycobacterium avium Complex
- MALDI-TOF MS:
-
Matrix-assisted laser-desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry
- CLSI:
-
Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute
- STFX:
-
Sitafloxacin
- AMK:
-
Amikacin
- IPM:
-
Imipenem
- ABK:
-
Arbekacin
- HIV:
-
Human immunodeficiency virus
- FIC:
-
Fractional inhibitory concentration
- MBEC:
-
Minimum biofilm eradication concentration
- CAMHB:
-
Cation-adjusted Mueller–Hinton broth
- CFU:
-
Colony forming units
References
Griffith, D. E., Girard, W. M. & Wallace Jr, R. J. Clinical features of pulmonary disease caused by rapidly growing mycobacteria. An analysis of 154 patients. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 147(5), 1271–1278 (1993).
Harada, T. et al. Clinical and microbiological differences between Mycobacterium abscessus and Mycobacterium massiliense lung diseases. J. Clin. Microbiol. 50(11), 3556–3561 (2012).
Nagano, H. et al. Causative species of nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease and comparative investigation on clinical features of Mycobacterium abscessus complex disease: A retrospective analysis for two major hospitals in a subtropical region of Japan. PLoS ONE 12(10), e0186826 (2017).
Floto, R. A. et al. US Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and European Cystic Fibrosis Society consensus recommendations for the management of non-tuberculous mycobacteria in individuals with cystic fibrosis: Executive summary. Thorax 71(1), 88–90 (2016).
Harris, K. A. & Kenna, D. T. D. Mycobacterium abscessus infection in cystic fibrosis: Molecular typing and clinical outcomes. J. Med. Microbiol. 63(Pt 10), 1241–1246 (2014).
Esther, C. R. Jr., Esserman, D. A., Gilligan, P., Kerr, A. & Noone, P. G. Chronic Mycobacterium abscessus infection and lung function decline in cystic fibrosis. J. Cyst. Fibros. 9(2), 117–123 (2010).
Daley, C. L. et al. Treatment of nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease: An official ATS/ERS/ESCMID/IDSA clinical practice guideline. Clin. Infect. Dis. 71(4), 905–913 (2020).
Ferro, B. E. et al. Tigecycline is highly efficacious against Mycobacterium abscessus pulmonary disease. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 60(5), 2895–2900 (2016).
Yang, B. et al. Clofazimine-containing regimen for the treatment of Mycobacterium abscessus lung disease. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 61, 6 (2017).
Olivier, K. N. et al. Inhaled amikacin for treatment of refractory pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial disease. Ann. Am. Thorac. Soc. 11(1), 30–35 (2014).
Asami, T. et al. Efficacy estimation of a combination of triple antimicrobial agents against clinical isolates of Mycobacterium abscessus subsp. abscessus in vitro. JAC Antimicrob. Resist. 3(1), dlab004 (2021).
Namkoong, H. et al. Clinical efficacy and safety of multidrug therapy including thrice weekly intravenous amikacin administration for Mycobacterium abscessus pulmonary disease in outpatient settings: A case series. BMC Infect. Dis. 16, 396 (2016).
Fung-Tomc, J. et al. In vitro antibacterial spectrum of a new broad-spectrum 8-methoxy fluoroquinolone, gatifloxacin. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 45(4), 437–446 (2000).
Tomioka, H., Sano, C., Sato, K. & Shimizu, T. Antimicrobial activities of clarithromycin, gatifloxacin and sitafloxacin, in combination with various antimycobacterial drugs against extracellular and intramacrophage Mycobacterium avium complex. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 19(2), 139–145 (2002).
Tomioka, H. et al. Comparative in vitro antimicrobial activities of the newly synthesized quinolone HSR-903, sitafloxacin (DU-6859a), gatifloxacin (AM-1155), and levofloxacin against Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium avium complex. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 43(12), 3001–3004 (1999).
Sano, C. et al. Comparative in vitro and in vivo antimicrobial activities of sitafloxacin, gatifloxacin and moxifloxacin against Mycobacterium avium. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 37(4), 296–301 (2011).
Eckstein, T. M., Inamine, J. M., Lambert, M. L. & Belisle, J. T. A genetic mechanism for deletion of the ser2 gene cluster and formation of rough morphological variants of Mycobacterium avium. J. Bacteriol. 182(21), 6177–6182 (2000).
Fregnan, G. B. & Smith, D. W. Description of various colony forms of mycobacteria. J. Bacteriol. 83, 819–827 (1962).
Howard, S. T. & Byrd, T. F. The rapidly growing mycobacteria: Saprophytes and parasites. Microbes Infect. 2(15), 1845–1853 (2000).
Lopez Marin, L. M., Laneelle, M. A., Prome, D. & Daffe, M. Structures of the glycopeptidolipid antigens of two animal pathogens: Mycobacterium senegalense and Mycobacterium porcinum. Eur. J. Biochem. 215(3), 859–866 (1993).
Ripoll, F. et al. Genomics of glycopeptidolipid biosynthesis in Mycobacterium abscessus and M. chelonae. BMC Genomics 8, 114 (2007).
Field, S. K., Fisher, D. & Cowie, R. L. Mycobacterium avium complex pulmonary disease in patients without HIV infection. Chest 126(2), 566–581 (2004).
Wagner, D. & Young, L. S. Nontuberculous mycobacterial infections: A clinical review. Infection 32(5), 257–270 (2004).
Horsburgh, C. R. Jr. The pathophysiology of disseminated Mycobacterium avium complex disease in AIDS. J. Infect. Dis. 179(Suppl 3), S461-465 (1999).
Howard, S. T. et al. Spontaneous reversion of Mycobacterium abscessus from a smooth to a rough morphotype is associated with reduced expression of glycopeptidolipid and reacquisition of an invasive phenotype. Microbiology (Reading). 152(Pt 6), 1581–1590 (2006).
Catherinot, E. et al. Acute respiratory failure involving an R variant of Mycobacterium abscessus. J. Clin. Microbiol. 47(1), 271–274 (2009).
Rhoades, E. R. et al. Mycobacterium abscessus glycopeptidolipids mask underlying cell wall phosphatidyl-myo-inositol mannosides blocking induction of human macrophage TNF-alpha by preventing interaction with TLR2. J. Immunol. 183(3), 1997–2007 (2009).
Clary, G. et al. Mycobacterium abscessus smooth and rough morphotypes form antimicrobial-tolerant biofilm phenotypes but are killed by acetic acid. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 62(3), e02101 (2018).
Takei, S. et al. The synergetic effect of imipenem–clarithromycin combination in the Mycobacteroides abscessus complex. BMC Microbiol. 20(1), 316 (2020).
Lorian, V. Antibiotics in Laboratory Medicine 4th edn. (Williams & Wilkins, 1996).
Takano, K. et al. Severe pulmonary Mycobacterium abscessus cases due to co-infection with other microorganisms well treated by clarithromycin and sitafloxacin in Japan. Int. Med. Case Rep. J. 14, 465–470 (2021).
Whang, J. et al. Mycobacterium abscessus glycopeptidolipids inhibit macrophage apoptosis and bacterial spreading by targeting mitochondrial cyclophilin D. Cell Death Dis. 8(8), e3012 (2017).
Bernut, A. et al. Mycobacterium abscessus cording prevents phagocytosis and promotes abscess formation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111(10), E943-952 (2014).
Catherinot, E. et al. Hypervirulence of a rough variant of the Mycobacterium abscessus type strain. Infect Immun. 75(2), 1055–1058 (2007).
Jonsson, B. E. et al. Molecular epidemiology of Mycobacterium abscessus, with focus on cystic fibrosis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 45(5), 1497–1504 (2007).
Sanguinetti, M. et al. Fatal pulmonary infection due to multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium abscessus in a patient with cystic fibrosis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 39(2), 816–819 (2001).
Kim, B. J. et al. Discovery of a novel hsp65 genotype within Mycobacterium massiliense associated with the rough colony morphology. PLoS ONE 7(6), e38420 (2012).
Yoshida, S. et al. Further isolation of Mycobacterium abscessus subsp. abscessus and subsp. bolletii in different regions of Japan and susceptibility of these isolates to antimicrobial agents. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 42(3), 226–231 (2013).
Woods, G. L. et al. Susceptibility Testing of Mycobacteria, Nocardiae, and Other Aerobic Actinomycetes (Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2011).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Grant for Cross-disciplinary Collaboration, Juntendo University (grant no. 2019-46 to T. Okabe).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
J.W. and H.I. wrote the main manuscript text and J.W., S.T., Y.F., H.T., K.K., Y.A., K.S., I.S., and Y.O. collected the data and samples with all firures and tables. All authors reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Watanabe, J., Ihara, H., Takei, S. et al. The synergetic effect of sitafloxacin–arbekacin combination in the Mycobacterium abscessus species. Sci Rep 13, 2027 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-29021-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-29021-0
- Springer Nature Limited