Skip to main content
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy logoLink to Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
. 2017 Mar 24;61(4):e02440-16. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02440-16

Inhibition of the β-Lactamase BlaMab by Avibactam Improves the In Vitro and In Vivo Efficacy of Imipenem against Mycobacterium abscessus

Anne-Laure Lefebvre a,b,c, Vincent Le Moigne d, Audrey Bernut e, Carole Veckerlé a,b,c, Fabrice Compain a,b,c,f, Jean-Louis Herrmann d, Laurent Kremer e,g, Michel Arthur a,b,c,, Jean-Luc Mainardi a,b,c,f,
PMCID: PMC5365697  PMID: 28096155

ABSTRACT

Mycobacterium abscessus pulmonary infections are treated with a macrolide (clarithromycin or azithromycin), an aminoglycoside (amikacin), and a β-lactam (cefoxitin or imipenem). The triple combination is used without any β-lactamase inhibitor, even though M. abscessus produces the broad-spectrum β-lactamase BlaMab. We determine whether inhibition of BlaMab by avibactam improves the activity of imipenem against M. abscessus. The bactericidal activity of drug combinations was assayed in broth and in human macrophages. The in vivo efficacy of the drugs was tested by monitoring the survival of infected zebrafish embryos. The level of BlaMab production in broth and in macrophages was compared by quantitative reverse transcription-PCR and Western blotting. The triple combination of imipenem (8 or 32 μg/ml), amikacin (32 μg/ml), and avibactam (4 μg/ml) was bactericidal in broth (<0.1% survival), with 3.2- and 4.3-log10 reductions in the number of CFU being achieved at 72 h when imipenem was used at 8 and 32 μg/ml, respectively. The triple combination achieved significant intracellular killing, with the bacterial survival rates being 54% and 7% with the low (8 μg/ml) and high (32 μg/ml) dosages of imipenem, respectively. In vivo inhibition of BlaMab by avibactam improved the survival of zebrafish embryos treated with imipenem. Expression of the gene encoding BlaMab was induced (20-fold) in the infected macrophages. Inhibition of BlaMab by avibactam improved the efficacy of imipenem against M. abscessus in vitro, in macrophages, and in zebrafish embryos, indicating that this β-lactamase inhibitor should be clinically evaluated. The in vitro evaluation of imipenem may underestimate the impact of BlaMab, since the production of the β-lactamase is inducible in macrophages.

KEYWORDS: β-lactamase inhibitor, avibactam, Mycobacterium abscessus, cystic fibrosis, imipenem

INTRODUCTION

In the context of cystic fibrosis, Mycobacterium abscessus has emerged in recent years as an important opportunistic lung pathogen increasingly responsible for mortality (15). These infections are extremely difficult to treat and to eradicate, as M. abscessus is naturally resistant to most antibiotics, including antituberculous agents (6, 7). The recommended treatment for pulmonary infections relies on the combination of a macrolide (clarithromycin or azithromycin), an aminoglycoside (amikacin), and an intravenous β-lactam (cefoxitin or imipenem) for at least 12 to 16 months (6, 8). Resistance to macrolide, present in 40 to 60% of the isolates (9), leads to a cure rate of only 25 to 40% (whereas the cure rate is 88 to 95% for patients infected with macrolide-susceptible isolates). Cefoxitin and imipenem are the most active β-lactams, in spite of moderate in vitro activity with MICs (MIC50s) of 32 and 16 μg/ml, respectively (10).

We have previously shown that the production of a broad-spectrum β-lactamase, the M. abscessus β-lactamase (BlaMab), is a major determinant of β-lactam resistance in M. abscessus (11, 12). In contrast to the β-lactamase BlaC from M. tuberculosis, BlaMab is not inactivated by clavulanate, sulbactam, and tazobactam, since these inhibitors are hydrolyzed by the β-lactamase. However, BlaMab is efficiently inhibited by avibactam (12), a β-lactamase inhibitor approved by the FDA in 2014 (13, 14). Deletion of the gene encoding BlaMab or chemical inhibition of the β-lactamase activity by avibactam extends the spectrum of β-lactams active against M. abscessus, as previously shown for an extensive evaluation of the amoxicillin-avibactam combination (12).

Recently, we have reported that the rate of killing of an M. abscessus BlaMab-deficient mutant by the combination of imipenem and amikacin is significantly higher than that of the parental strain (15). In macrophages, the difference was even more pronounced, since a 100-fold reduction in the number of intracellular bacteria was observed for the BlaMab-deficient mutant, whereas the combination was only bacteriostatic for the wild-type strain (15). Together, the results obtained with the BlaMab-deficient mutant indicated that the production of the β-lactamase may limit the efficacy of imipenem, despite the fact that this drug is used in the absence of a β-lactamase inhibitor in the recommended treatment of pulmonary infections due to M. abscessus. In this study, we evaluated whether BlaMab inhibition by avibactam could potentiate the effects of imipenem in vitro, in macrophages, and in zebrafish embryos. The zebrafish embryo model has been developed to assess the in vivo activity of antibiotics against M. abscessus (16). Unexpectedly, we found that the production of BlaMab has a greater impact on the activity of imipenem in macrophages than in in vitro cultures, prompting us to determine and compare the level of BlaMab production in planktonically and intracellularly growing M. abscessus bacteria.

RESULTS

In vitro killing of M. abscessus CIP104536 S by imipenem alone or in combination with amikacin and avibactam.

Imipenem was tested at 8 μg/ml and 32 μg/ml, doses that correspond to concentrations equal to 4- and 16-fold the MICs of the drug against M. abscessus CIP104536 with a smooth morphotype (CIP104536 S), respectively (15). Amikacin was tested at 4-fold the MIC (32 μg/ml). Avibactam was tested at 4 μg/ml, which is the concentration used for susceptibility testing in Enterobacteriaceae (17, 18). Reductions in the log10 number of CFU of M. abscessus CIP104536 S were observed for imipenem at 8 μg/ml when it was tested alone (1.7 log10) or in combination with amikacin (2.3 log10) or avibactam (1.9 log10) (Fig. 1a; see Table S2 in the supplemental material for the results of statistical analysis). The triple combination of imipenem-amikacin-avibactam was bactericidal (less than 0.1% survival), achieving a 3.2-log10 reduction in the number of CFU. The triple combination was more active than imipenem plus avibactam (3.2- versus 1.9-log10 reductions; P < 0.05), but the difference from the results obtained with imipenem plus amikacin was not significant (3.2- versus 2.3-log10 reductions; P = 0.12). Increasing the imipenem concentration from 8 μg/ml (Fig. 1a) to 32 μg/ml (Fig. 1b) moderately increased the activity of imipenem alone (1.7- versus 2.2-log10 reductions), of imipenem combined with amikacin (2.3- versus 2.7-log10 reductions), and of imipenem combined with avibactam (1.9- versus 2.3-log10 reductions), but none of these differences were statistically significant. Imipenem at 32 μg/ml combined with amikacin and avibactam was the most active drug combination, achieving a 4.3-log10 reduction.

FIG 1.

FIG 1

Time-kill curves of the activity of imipenem (IPM) alone or in combination with the β-lactamase inhibitor avibactam (AVI) and amikacin (AMK) against M. abscessus CIP104536 S. (a) Time-kill curves of imipenem at 8 μg/ml alone or in combination with avibactam (4 μg/ml) and amikacin (32 μg/ml). The number of CFU was determined after 0, 48, and 72 h of exposure to the antibiotics. (b) Time-kill curves of imipenem at 32 μg/ml alone or in combination with avibactam (4 μg/ml) and amikacin (32 μg/ml).

Intramacrophage activity of imipenem alone or in combination with amikacin and avibactam.

THP-1-derived macrophages were infected with M. abscessus CIP104536 S and exposed to various drugs for 2 days, and the surviving bacteria were enumerated by plating serial dilutions of macrophage lysates (Fig. 2; see Table S3 in the supplemental material for the results of statistical analysis). In the absence of antibiotic, M. abscessus CIP104536 S grew in macrophages, leading to a 100-fold increase in the number of CFU at 2 days. Imipenem at 8 μg/ml (Fig. 2) partially prevented the intramacrophage growth of M. abscessus CIP104536 S (4.5- versus 100-fold increases in the number of CFU; P < 0.05). Amikacin was also active (8-fold increase in the number of CFU; P < 0.05). The combination of imipenem and amikacin was not more active than imipenem alone (4.5- versus 5.0-fold increases in the number of CFU, respectively; P = 0.51). In contrast, avibactam improved the activity of imipenem, preventing the intracellular proliferation of M. abscessus CIP104536 S (1.1- versus 4.5-fold increases in the number of CFU; P < 0.05). The combination of imipenem (8 μg/ml), amikacin, and avibactam was the only combination that reduced the number of intracellular bacteria (fold change in the number of CFU, 0.54). This value was significantly different from that obtained with imipenem combined with avibactam (fold change in the number of CFU, 0.54 versus 1.1; P < 0.05). Increasing the concentration of imipenem from 8 μg/ml to 32 μg/ml improved the activity of the drug tested alone (4.5- versus 1.6-fold change in the number of CFU) and in combination with amikacin (5.0- versus 1.1-fold change), avibactam (1.1- versus 0.1-fold change), and amikacin and avibactam (0.54- versus 0.07-fold change). The latter differences were significant (P < 0.05). In conclusion, avibactam significantly improved the activity of imipenem when it was tested both with and without amikacin. Significant intracellular killing was obtained with the double and triple combinations involving imipenem at 32 μg/ml and avibactam with or without amikacin.

FIG 2.

FIG 2

Intracellular activity of imipenem (IPM; 8 μg/ml and 32 μg/ml) alone or in combination with the β-lactamase inhibitor avibactam (AVI; 16 μg/ml) and amikacin (AMK; 8 μg/ml) against M. abscessus CIP104536 S. Intracellular bacteria were enumerated, and the fold change in the number of CFU was determined at between days 0 and 2 postinfection. Bars represent standard deviations.

BlaMab is produced at a high level within macrophages.

The expression of blaMab was investigated at both the transcriptional and translational levels in M. abscessus bacteria grown in vitro or proliferating in infected macrophages. Quantitative reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR) analyses indicated that the growth of M. abscessus within macrophages led to a 20-fold increase in the relative abundance of the blaMab transcript in comparison to that in planktonic cultures performed in vitro in 7H9sB medium (Fig. 3a). Western blot analysis confirmed that BlaMab is produced at a higher level in macrophages (Fig. 3b).

FIG 3.

FIG 3

Production of BlaMab in vitro and in macrophages. (a) Quantification of blaMab by qRT-PCR. RNA was isolated from wild-type strain CIP CIP104536 S grown in vitro in 7H9 medium for 48 h or in human J774 macrophages for 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 96 h. sigA rRNA was used as an internal standard. The values are the ratio of intramacrophage growth to in vitro growth. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations from three experiments performed in triplicate. Bars represent standard deviations. (b) Immunodetection of BlaMab. Protein extracts were prepared from wild-type strain CIP104536 S and its ΔblaMab derivative grown in vitro in 7H9 medium for 48 h or in human J774 macrophages for 1 h, 24 h, and 48 h. Proteins (3 μg) were separated by 15% SDS-PAGE. Immunodetection was performed with a mouse immune serum specific for BlaMab and a peroxidase-conjugated goat anti-mouse immunoglobulin antibody. Immunodetection of KasA was used as a loading control.

Avibactam increases the efficacy of imipenem in the zebrafish model of M. abscessus infection.

The zebrafish model of M. abscessus infection (16) was used to assess the in vivo efficacy of imipenem following inhibition of BlaMab by avibactam (Fig. 4). Although imipenem alone was active, avibactam further increased larval survival (P < 0.05 for both concentrations of imipenem tested). These results indicate that the production of BlaMab during infection impairs the efficacy of imipenem and that chemical inhibition by avibactam overcomes the deleterious effect of the β-lactamase.

FIG 4.

FIG 4

Efficacy of imipenem alone or in combination with avibactam in zebrafish embryos infected by M. abscessus CIP104536 R expressing TdTomato. Embryos (60/300 per group) were infected at 30 h postfertilization and exposed to imipenem (IMI) from 1 to 6 days postinfection (dpi) at two concentrations (180 [left] and 360 μg/ml [right]) alone or in combination with avibactam at 50 μg/ml (avi). Control animals were left untreated (UNT). The survival of animals was monitored each day postinfection, and the results were expressed as the percent larval survival. *, P < 0.05.

DISCUSSION

Here, we assessed whether the inhibition of the β-lactamase BlaMab by avibactam improves the efficacy of imipenem against M. abscessus. The impact of the β-lactamase inhibitor was assessed in vitro and in infected macrophages by determining the killing activity of various drug combinations. Avibactam was also investigated by monitoring the survival of infected zebrafish embryos treated with imipenem alone or in combination with the inhibitor. In macrophages, avibactam significantly improved the activity of imipenem in all drug combinations tested, which included two dosages of imipenem with or without amikacin (Fig. 2). Imipenem combined with avibactam and amikacin was highly active in macrophages, leading to 93% intracellular killing at the highest dose tested. In the zebrafish model, imipenem alone increased the survival of the embryos, as previously reported (16), and the efficacy of the drug was significantly improved by avibactam (Fig. 4). Amikacin could not be tested in this model due to its toxicity during larval development (data not shown). Time-kill curves showed that the triple combinations of imipenem (8 and 32 μg/ml), avibactam, and amikacin were bactericidal (less than 0.1% survival; Fig. 1a and b). These associations were the most active, although statistical analysis did not demonstrate a significant impact of avibactam. The blaMab transcript was 20-fold less abundant in M. abscessus bacteria proliferating in planktonic cultures than in M. abscessus bacteria in infected macrophages (Fig. 3). Thus, the high level of production of BlaMab in the infected macrophages, which was confirmed by Western blotting, may account for the fact that avibactam has a greater impact on the efficacy of imipenem intracellularly than in vitro. The induction of blaMab in macrophages indicates that the in vitro evaluation of imipenem may underestimate the impact of the β-lactamase BlaMab. Of note, there is only a 2-fold difference in the MIC of imipenem against the BlaMab-deficient mutant of M. abscessus and that against the parental strain (19).

Two β-lactams, cefoxitin and imipenem, are recommended for the treatment of pulmonary infections due to M. abscessus (8). Currently, there is no recommendation for the preferential use of one these drugs. We have previously shown that BlaMab hydrolyzes imipenem with a moderate but significant catalytic efficacy (3 × 104 M−1 s−1) (11). BlaMab is 4,000-fold less active for the hydrolysis of cefoxitin. The low efficacy of hydrolysis of cefoxitin by BlaMab is likely to be irrelevant since the killing curve assay did not reveal any difference in the activity of cefoxitin, alone or in combination with amikacin, against a BlaMab-deficient mutant of M. abscessus and the parental strain (15). In this study, we have shown that imipenem is highly active in macrophages, but this requires combination with avibactam due to the induction of blaMab. Together, these data indicate that imipenem is intrinsically more active than cefoxitin, although this difference is compensated for by the higher level of hydrolysis of imipenem by the β-lactamase BlaMab.

The assessments of the efficacy of drug combinations in vitro (Fig. 1), in macrophages (Fig. 2), and in the zebrafish (Fig. 4) indicate that the triple combination of avibactam, imipenem, and amikacin should be clinically evaluated, particularly in infections due to clarithromycin-resistant M. abscessus, which are often not cured by the recommended treatments (7, 2022). Unfortunately, avibactam is currently manufactured in combination with ceftazidime, which has no activity against M. abscessus (12). Formulation of avibactam independently from any β-lactam partner would be necessary to provide cystic fibrosis patients access to the avibactam-imipenem-amikacin combination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Bacterial strains and growth conditions.

M. abscessus CIP104536 (ATCC 19977) with a smooth (S) or rough (R) morphotype and the respective β-lactamase-deficient derivatives (ΔblaMab) (12) were grown in Middlebrook 7H9 broth (BD-Difco, Le Pont de Claix, France) supplemented with 10% (vol/vol) oleic acid, albumin, dextrose, and catalase (OADC; BD-Difco) and 0.05% (vol/vol) Tween 80 (Sigma-Aldrich) (7H9sB) at 30°C with shaking (150 rpm) (23).

Antibiotics.

Amikacin was provided by Bristol-Myers Squibb (Rueil-Malmaison, France), and imipenem was provided by Mylan (Saint-Priest, France). Avibactam was provided by AstraZeneca. Water was the solvent used to prepare stock solutions, which were freshly prepared for each experiment and filtered using a sterilized 0.22-μm-pore-size polycarbonate syringe filter (Millipore, Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, France).

Time-kill assay.

Bottles of 20 ml of 7H9sB containing imipenem, amikacin, and avibactam alone or in combination were inoculated with exponentially growing bacteria of M. abscessus CIP104536 S (7 × 106 CFU/ml) and incubated with shaking (150 rpm) at 30°C for 72 h. Bacteria were enumerated at 0, 48, and 72 h by plating serial dilutions prepared in sterile saline solution on lysogeny broth (LB) plates. The plates were incubated for 4 days at 30°C. The detection limit was 2 log10 CFU/ml. The experiments were performed in triplicate.

Activity of imipenem alone or in combination with amikacin and avibactam in THP-1 macrophages.

The activity of antibiotics was studied as previously described (15). Briefly, THP-1 cells were seeded into 24-well plates (5 × 105 cells per 1-ml well), differentiated for 24 h, and infected with M. abscessus CIP104536 S at a multiplicity of infection of 10 for 3 h. Imipenem (8 and 32 μg/ml), amikacin (8 μg/ml), and avibactam (16 μg/ml) alone or in combination were added to each well. The plates were incubated with 5% CO2 at 37°C for 2 days. Macrophages were lysed with deionized water. Dilutions were plated onto LB agar plates, and the CFU were enumerated after 4 days of incubation at 30°C. The experiments were performed in triplicate.

Determination of blaMab mRNA by qRT-PCR.

Extraction of bacterial RNA from M. abscessus-infected macrophages was performed as previously described (24). Briefly, bacterial cells were harvested after different times postinfection, washed once with Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium alone, and resuspended in 4 M guanidine thiocyanate solution containing β-mercaptoethanol. RNA was extracted and cDNA was prepared as previously described (24). See Table S1 in the supplemental material for the sequences of the primers used for qRT-PCR. Controls without reverse transcriptase were used with each RNA sample to rule out DNA contamination (24). sigA gene RNA was included as an internal control.

Mouse anti-BlaMab antibodies.

Purified BlaMab (12) was subcutaneously injected into five BALB/c mice (Janvier, France) (20 μg per mouse) with incomplete Freund's adjuvant (1/1, vol/vol) on days 1, 28, and 57. At 1 week after days 28 and 57, blood samples were obtained from the retroorbital plexus, centrifuged, and stored at −20°C until use. All procedures were performed according to institutional and national ethical guidelines under agreement 92-033-01 (Préfecture des Hauts-de-Seine, Boulogne-Billancourt, France).

Immunodetection of BlaMab in protein extracts.

Bacterial pellets were obtained from M. abscessus cells grown in vitro and in human macrophages as previously described (24). Briefly, bacteria were resuspended in 5 ml of cooled phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) containing 1% Triton X-100 for 5 min at room temperature. Then, 2.5 ml of cold PBS was added and the suspension was centrifuged at 2,500 × g for 15 min. Bacteria were resuspended in 0.5 ml Tris-buffered saline (TBS) and lysed by sonication 3 times for 30 s each time with 1-min cooling intervals on ice. After centrifugation at 14,000 × g for 10 min, the protein concentration was determined using the Bradford assay with bovine serum albumin as the standard. Proteins in crude extracts (3 μg) were separated by 15% SDS-PAGE and transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA), and BlaMab was detected with mouse anti-BlaMab antiserum (1/6,000). A peroxidase-conjugated goat anti-mouse immunoglobulin antibody (IgG; 1/4,000) was used as the secondary antibody. Rat anti-KasA antibodies were used as a loading control (25).

Evaluation of imipenem in a zebrafish model of M. abscessus infection.

The zebrafish model of M. abscessus infection was used to assess the in vivo activity of imipenem alone or in combination with avibactam. The TdTomato-expressing M. abscessus CIP104536 R derivative was injected in zebrafish embryos according to procedures described earlier (26). Briefly, systemic infections were carried by the injection of 150 CFU into the caudal vein of embryos at 30 h postfertilization. Infected larvae were exposed to various imipenem concentrations (180 and 360 μg/ml) alone or in combination with avibactam at 50 μg/ml. Drug-containing water was renewed daily for 5 days from day 1 to day 6 postinfection. The viability of the infected embryos was evaluated daily by assessment of cardiac activity. The zebrafish experiments were conducted in accordance with the guidelines from the European Union for the handling of laboratory animals (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/home_en.htm) and approved by the Direction Sanitaire et Vétérinaire de l'Hérault et Comité d'Ethique pour l'Expérimentation Animale de la Région Languedoc Roussillon under reference number CEEA-LR-1145.

Statistical analysis.

The Mann-Whitney U test and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare the intracellular activities of the antibiotics. For the zebrafish infection model, experiments were performed at least in triplicate. Data from the replicates were pooled for the construction and comparison of survival curves. The efficacy of imipenem alone or in combination with avibactam was compared using the log-rank test. All statistical analyses were performed with EPI Info software (version 7.1.3; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA).

Supplementary Material

Supplemental material

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank AstraZeneca for providing the avibactam.

This work was supported by the Vaincre la Mucoviscidose and l'Association Grégory Lemarchal (Ph.D. fellowship to A.-L.L. and grant RF20150501376 to J.-L.M., J.-L.H., and L.K.) and the ANR DIMYVIR (to J.-L.H. and L.K.).

J.-L.M. has received consulting fees (as a scientific advisor for ceftaroline) and reimbursement of travel expenses (attendance at the 54th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 2014) from AstraZeneca. All other authors have no conflicts to declare.

Footnotes

Supplemental material for this article may be found at https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.02440-16.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Sermet-Gaudelus I, Le Bourgeois M, Pierre-Audigier C, Offredo C, Guillemot D, Halley S, Akoua-Koffi C, Vincent V, Sivadon-Tardy V, Ferroni A, Berche P, Scheinmann P, Lenoir G, Gaillard JL. 2003. Mycobacterium abscessus and children with cystic fibrosis. Emerg Infect Dis 9:1587–1591. doi: 10.3201/eid0912.020774. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Esther CR Jr, Esserman DA, Gilligan P, Kerr A, Noone PG. 2011. Chronic Mycobacterium abscessus infection and lung function decline in cystic fibrosis. J Cyst Fibros 9:117–123. doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2009.12.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Olivier KN, Weber DJ, Wallace RJ Jr, Faiz AR, Lee JH, Zhang Y, Brown-Elliot BA, Handler A, Wilson RW, Schechter MS, Edwards LJ, Chakraborti S, Knowles MR. 2003. Nontuberculous mycobacteria. I. Multicenter prevalence study in cystic fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 167:828–834. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200207-678OC. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Levy I, Grisaru-Soen G, Lerner-Geva L, Kerem E, Blau H, Bentur L, Aviram M, Rivlin J, Picard E, Lavy A, Yahav Y, Rahav G. 2008. Multicenter cross-sectional study of nontuberculous mycobacterial infections among cystic fibrosis patients, Israel. Emerg Infect Dis 14:378–384. doi: 10.3201/eid1403.061405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Roux AL, Catherinot E, Ripoll F, Soismier N, Macheras E, Ravilly S, Bellis G, Vibet MA, Le Roux E, Lemonnier L, Gutierrez C, Vincent V, Fauroux B, Rottman M, Guillemot D, Gaillard JL. 2009. Multicenter study of prevalence of nontuberculous mycobacteria in patients with cystic fibrosis in France. J Clin Microbiol 47:4124–4128. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01257-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Brown-Elliott BA, Nash KA, Wallace RJ Jr. 2012. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing, drug resistance mechanisms, and therapy of infections with nontuberculous mycobacteria. Clin Microbiol Rev 25:545–582. doi: 10.1128/CMR.05030-11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Novosad SA, Beekmann SE, Polgreen PM, Mackey K, Winthrop KL, M abscessus Study Team. 2016. Treatment of Mycobacterium abscessus infection. Emerg Infect Dis 22:511–514. doi: 10.3201/eid2203.150828. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Floto RA, Olivier KN, Saiman L, Daley CL, Herrmann JL, Nick JA, Noone PG, Bilton D, Corris P, Gibson RL, Hempstead SE, Koetz K, Sabadosa KA, Sermet-Gaudelus I, Smyth AR, van Ingen J, Wallace RJ, Winthrop KL, Marshall BC, Haworth CS. 2016. US Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and European Cystic Fibrosis Society consensus recommendations for the management of non-tuberculous mycobacteria in individuals with cystic fibrosis. Thorax 71(Suppl 1):i1–i22. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207360. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Bastian S, Veziris N, Roux AL, Brossier F, Gaillard JL, Jarlier V, Cambau E. 2011. Assessment of clarithromycin susceptibility in strains belonging to the Mycobacterium abscessus group by erm(41) and rrl sequencing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 55:775–781. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00861-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lavollay M, Dubee V, Heym B, Herrmann JL, Gaillard JL, Gutmann L, Arthur M, Mainardi JL. 2014. In vitro activity of cefoxitin and imipenem against Mycobacterium abscessus complex. Clin Microbiol Infect 20:O297–O300. doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Soroka D, Dubee V, Soulier-Escrihuela O, Cuinet G, Hugonnet JE, Gutmann L, Mainardi JL, Arthur M. 2014. Characterization of broad-spectrum Mycobacterium abscessus class A beta-lactamase. J Antimicrob Chemother 69:691–696. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkt410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Dubee V, Bernut A, Cortes M, Lesne T, Dorchene D, Lefebvre A-L, Hugonnet J-E, Gutmann L, Mainardi J-L, Herrmann J-L, Gaillard J-L, Kremer L, Arthur M. 2015. β-Lactamase inhibition by avibactam in Mycobacterium abscessus. J Antimicrob Chemother 70:1051–1058. doi: 10.1093/jac/dku510. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Falcone M, Paterson D. 2016. Spotlight on ceftazidime/avibactam: a new option for MDR Gram-negative infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 71:2713–2722. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkw239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Bush K. 2015. A resurgence of beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations effective against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens. Int J Antimicrob Agents 46:483–493. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2015.08.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Lefebvre AL, Dubee V, Cortes M, Dorchêne D, Arthur M, Mainardi JL. 2016. Bactericidal and intracellular activity of β-lactams against Mycobacterium abscessus. J Antimicrob Chemother 71:1556–1563. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkw022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Bernut A, Le Moigne V, Lesne T, Lutfalla G, Herrmann JL, Kremer L. 2014. In vivo assessment of drug efficacy against Mycobacterium abscessus using the embryonic zebrafish test system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 58:4054–4063. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00142-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Shields RK, Clancy CJ, Hao B, Chen L, Press EG, Iovine NM, Kreiswirth BN, Nguyen MH. 2015. Effects of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase subtypes, extended-spectrum β-lactamases, and porin mutations on the in vitro activity of ceftazidime-avibactam against carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 59:5793–5797. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00548-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Hackel M, Kazmierczak KM, Hoban DJ, Biedenbach DJ, Bouchillon SK, de Jonge BL, Stone GG. 2016. Assessment of the in vitro activity of ceftazidime-avibactam against multidrug-resistant Klebsiella spp. collected in the INFORM global surveillance study, 2012 to 2014. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 60:4677–4683. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02841-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Dubee V, Soroka D, Cortes M, Lefebvre A-L, Gutmann L, Hugonnet J-E, Arthur M, Mainardi J-L. 2015. Impact of beta-lactamase inhibition on the activity of ceftaroline against Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium abscessus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 59:2938–2941. doi: 10.1128/AAC.05080-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Koh WJ, Jeon K, Lee NY, Kim BJ, Kook YH, Lee SH, Park YK, Kim CK, Shin SJ, Huitt GA, Daley CL, Kwon OJ. 2011. Clinical significance of differentiation of Mycobacterium massiliense from Mycobacterium abscessus. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 183:405–410. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201003-0395OC. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Jarand J, Levin A, Zhang L, Huitt G, Mitchell JD, Daley CL. 2011. Clinical and microbiologic outcomes in patients receiving treatment for Mycobacterium abscessus pulmonary disease. Clin Infect Dis 52:565–571. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciq237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Harada T, Akiyama Y, Kurashima A, Nagai H, Tsuyuguchi K, Fujii T, Yano S, Shigeto E, Kuraoka T, Kajiki A, Kobashi Y, Kokubu F, Sato A, Yoshida S, Iwamoto T, Saito H. 2012. Clinical and microbiological differences between Mycobacterium abscessus and Mycobacterium massiliense lung diseases. J Clin Microbiol 50:3556–3561. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01175-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2011. M24-A2. Susceptibility testing of mycobacteria, nocardiae, and other aerobic actinomycetes; approved standard, 2nd ed Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Bakala N′Goma JC, Le Moigne V, Soismier N, Laencina L, Le Chevalier F, Roux AL, Poncin I, Serveau-Avesque C, Rottman M, Gaillard JL, Etienne G, Brosch R, Herrmann JL, Canaan S, Girard-Misguich F. 2015. Mycobacterium abscessus phospholipase C expression is induced during coculture within amoebae and enhances M. abscessus virulence in mice. Infect Immun 83:780–791. doi: 10.1128/IAI.02032-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Kremer L, Dover LG, Morbidoni HR, Vilcheze C, Maughan WN, Baulard A, Tu SC, Honore N, Deretic V, Sacchettini JC, Locht C, Jacobs WR Jr, Besra GS. 2003. Inhibition of InhA activity, but not KasA activity, induces formation of a KasA-containing complex in mycobacteria. J Biol Chem 278:20547–20554. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M302435200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Bernut A, Dupont C, Sahuquet A, Herrmann JL, Lutfalla G, Kremer L. 9 September 2015. Deciphering and imaging pathogenesis and cording of Mycobacterium abscessus in zebrafish embryos. J Vis Exp. doi: 10.3791/53130. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental material

Articles from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES