Skip to main content
Microbiology Spectrum logoLink to Microbiology Spectrum
. 2021 Nov 24;9(3):e01879-21. doi: 10.1128/Spectrum.01879-21

Prospective Activity of PLG0206, an Engineered Antimicrobial Peptide, on Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection Total Knee Arthroplasty Components Ex Vivo: The Knee Explant Analysis (KnEA) Study

David Huang a,, Dana M Parker b, Jonathan B Mandell b, Kimberly M Brothers b, Charles G Gish b, John A Koch b, Nicholas Pachuda a, Despina Dobbins a, Jonathan Steckbeck a, Kenneth L Urish b,c,d,e
Editor: Jeanette W P Teof
PMCID: PMC8612143  PMID: 34817227

ABSTRACT

PLG0206 is an engineered antimicrobial peptide that has completed phase 1 clinical studies. A prospective study was completed on explanted implants from chronic periprosthetic joint infections (n = 17). At a concentration of 1 mg/mL for 15 min, there was a mean 4-log10 reduction (range, 1 to 7) in the bacterial CFU identified from the implants.

IMPORTANCE Chronically infected prosthetics of the knee were exposed to PLG0206, an engineered antimicrobial peptide, at a concentration of 1 mg/mL for 15 min. A mean 4-log10 reduction (range, 1 to 7) in the number of bacteria occurred, which may translate to improved clinical outcomes for persons with prosthetic joint infection of the knee.

KEYWORDS: PJI, PLG0206, biofilms

OBSERVATION

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the leading cause of revision total knee arthroplasty, with high morbidity and mortality. The incidence of PJI is 1 to 3% in primary arthroplasty (1) and 3 to 10% in revision arthroplasty (2, 3). The incidence of PJI is projected to increase to 10,000 cases per year by 2030 (2). Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is a conservative treatment option for acute perioperative infection or an acute hematogenous infection of the knee. Unfortunately, this treatment is associated with failure rates of approximately 60% (410).

PLG0206 is a rationally designed, engineered antimicrobial peptide that is broad spectrum, rapidly acting, and active against antibiotic-tolerant biofilm (11, 12). The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the ex vivo activity of PLG0206 at an expected clinical concentration of at least 1 mg/mL for 15 min on explanted components from total knee arthroplasty (TKA) PJI. The primary objective was to determine the reduction in bacterial count compared to that in untreated explants.

From 25 January 2021 to 5 August 2021, 17 adult patients presented with chronic bacterial total knee arthroplasty (TKA) PJI at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Healthcare System (UPMC); despite receiving chronic suppressive oral/intravenous antibiotics, they required a 2-stage revision procedure for explantation of components. All patients met the criteria for a diagnosis of PJI as defined by the 2018 International Consensus Meeting (13). The infected prosthetics were removed and deidentified. PLG0206 was diluted in phosphate-buffered solution (PBS) at a concentration of 1 mg/mL and adjusted to pH 7.40. The removed implant prosthetics were submerged ex vivo with PLG0206 at an expected clinical concentration of 1 mg/mL for 15 min. The PLG0206 concentration of 1 mg/mL for 15 min was selected based off a series of in vitro time-kill studies and previous murine and rabbit PJI animal models (2-log reduction of Staphylococcus aureus CFU isolated from implant material following treatment with PLG0206 in combination with a DAIR procedure) (11). The explants were first rinsed with 50 mL PBS and then treated with 1 mg/mL PLG0206. After a 15-minute exposure to PLG0206, the explants were rinsed with 50 mL PBS, placed in PBS containing 1% Tween 20 (PBST), then sonicated for 10 min to disrupt the biofilm on the explant surface (14). Previous in vitro studies using the same sonication protocol did not demonstrate significant improvements in PLG0206 activity (11). The sonicated solution was then serially diluted and plated onto Trypticase soy agar (TSA) II sheep blood agar plates to determine the antibiotic sensitivity and bacterial burden determination in CFU per milliliter. The remaining explanted implant material from the same patient was sonicated and served as an untreated control. Quantitative culture was directly performed on the untreated sonicate, and when this was not possible, the CFU were estimated from the reported clinical value in the medical record. If a sample was deemed “too numerous to count,” the CFU were determined by serially diluting the sonicate. Fourteen of seventeen (82.4%) patients received antibiotics prior to the 2-stage revision procedure (Table 1). Both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria were identified from the removed prosthetics during the 2-stage revision procedure for chronic bacterial PJI. The most common bacteria identified from the prosthesis were Staphylococcus epidermidis (6/17; 35%), Staphylococcus aureus (3/17; 18%), and Escherichia coli (2/17; 12%). The majority (11/17; 65%) of the bacteria were resistant to at least one antibiotic (Table 1). Ten out of seventeen samples (59%) of the chronically infected prosthetics treated ex vivo with 1 mg/mL PLG0206 became culture negative. The infected prosthetics exposed to PLG0206 demonstrated a mean 4-log10 reduction (range, 1 to 7), whereas those not exposed to PLG0206 did not demonstrate any reduction in the bacterial burden. There were 7 samples, primarily at the beginning of the study, where estimates of the untreated bacterial burden were used because quantitative cultures were not available. All but one of these samples were culture negative after treatment with PLG0206. If these estimates are excluded from analysis, there was a mean 2.5-log10 reduction (range, 1 to 4).

TABLE 1.

Culture and CFU log reduction among bacteria identified from periprosthetic knee joints exposed and not exposed to PLG0206a

Prosthetic no. Preoperative antibiotics? Culture Resistance pattern CFU/mL untreated CFU/mL treated
1 Yes (cephalexin) Staphylococcus epidermidis Clindamycin, erythromycin, gentamicin, oxacillin 5 × 107b Culture negative
2 Yes (cephalexin) Staphylococcus epidermidis Clindamycin, erythromycin, gentamicin, oxacillin 5 × 107b Culture negative
3 No Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Oxacillin, erythromycin 5 × 107b Culture negative
4 Yes Staphylococcus haemolyticus Clindamycin, gentamicin, oxacillin, rifampin, TMP/SMX 7.3 × 102 Culture negative
5 Yes (TMP/SMX) Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) Susceptible 5 × 107b 12.5 × 103
6 Yes Staphylococcus caprae Susceptible 5 × 107b Culture negative
7 Yes (cefuroxime) Escherichia coli Ampicillin, ampicillin/sulbactam 3.5 × 104 6 × 101
8 Yes (cefuroxime) Escherichia coli Ampicillin, ampicillin/sulbactam 3.5 × 104 3 × 101
9 No Staphylococcus epidermidis Susceptible 1.9 × 105 9 × 101
10 Yes (doxycycline) Haemophilus parainfluenzae Susceptible 5 × 107b Culture negative
11 Yes (doxycycline) Haemophilus parainfluenzae Susceptible 5 × 107b Culture negative
12 Yes (ciprofloxacin) Enterococcus faecalis Susceptible 1.3 × 105 1 × 101
13 Yes (vancomycin) Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Oxacillin, erythromycin 1.1 × 105 Culture negative
14 Yes (vancomycin and cefepime) Streptococcus dysgalactiae Susceptible 6 × 101 Culture negative
15 No Staphylococcus epidermidis Penicillin 3.2 × 105 Culture negative
16 Yes (cephalexin) Staphylococcus epidermidis Oxacillin, tetracycline, TMP/SMX 3.2 × 103 Culture negative
17 Yes (cephalexin) Staphylococcus epidermidis Oxacillin, tetracycline, TMP/SMX 3.2 × 103 1 × 101
a

MRSA, methicillin-resistant S. aureus; MSSA, methicillin-sensitive S. aureus; TMP/SMX, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole.

b

Estimate of the CFU in untreated samples.

The microorganisms identified from the implant prosthetics are consistent with previously published studies (15, 16), in which S. aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) contribute to between 50 and 60% of PJIs. CoNS species, of which S. epidermidis was the most frequently identified pathogen of this group, are ubiquitous members of the human microbiome found on the skin. The relative pathogenicity of these microorganisms is unclear. However, both S. aureus and CoNS cause PJI primarily through their ability to adhere to prosthetic materials, produce biofilm, and produce virulence factors. In most studies, the most commonly isolated aerobic Gram-negative bacillus is E. coli (15, 16).

Many of the bacteria identified from the infected prosthetics were susceptible to the antibiotic the patient was prescribed prior to prosthetic removal. Biofilm formation may have protected the bacteria from the antibiotics as well as the host immune system, making treatment of the infection difficult without a biofilm-directed treatment strategy. Given the limitations of treatments currently available, this mandates surgical intervention, in many cases including complete removal of the prosthesis, in order to achieve infection control. The limited susceptibility of bacteria in biofilm is related to their low growth rate, the presence of resistant bacterial subpopulations, and a microenvironment within the biofilm that impairs antimicrobial activity (1719). Biofilm formation may also explain why some normal floral organisms traditionally considered “harmless” (e.g., coagulase-negative staphylococci) become pathogens when they are grown in the presence of foreign bodies.

In general, antimicrobial therapy should be pathogen directed and guided by the results of antimicrobial susceptibility testing, where applicable. However, most antimicrobials do not have antibiofilm activity. PLG0206 has broad-spectrum activity, including activity against multidrug-resistant bacteria that cause PJI, has potent activity against antibiotic-resistant biofilm, does not have significant local or systemic toxicity in the therapeutic range of dosing in animal models, and has pharmacokinetics with a half-life of more than 12 h (11, 12). In this study, after 15 min of exposure to an expected clinical concentration of 1 mg/mL, a mean 4-log10 reduction in CFU counts was observed among the prosthetics exposed to PLG0206 in comparison to those that were not. These findings support the development of PLG0206 as a local irrigation solution of at least a 1 mg/mL concentration in the wound cavity for 15 min for patients undergoing treatment of a PJI occurring after TKA or total hip arthroplasty (THA).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was designed, conducted, analyzed, and written up by Peptilogics. K.L.U. has equity and serves as a consultant to Peptilogics. CARB-X funding for this research was sponsored through cooperative agreement number 4500003336/IDSEP160030 from ASPR/BARDA and by an award from Wellcome Trust.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of CARB-X or any of its funders.

Contributor Information

David Huang, Email: david.huang@peptilogics.com.

Jeanette W. P. Teo, National University Hospital

REFERENCES

  • 1.Konigsberg BS, Hartman CW, Hewlett AL, Garvin KL. 2014. Current and future trends in the diagnosis of periprosthetic hip infection. Orthop Clin North Am 45:287–293. doi: 10.1016/j.ocl.2014.03.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. 2007. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:780–785. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00222. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Schmier J, Mowat F, Saleh K, Dybvik E, Kärrholm J, Garellick G, Havelin LI, Furnes O, Malchau H, Lau E. 2007. Future clinical and economic impact of revision total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:144–151. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00587. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Urish KL, Bullock AG, Kreger AM, Shah NB, Jeong K, Rothenberger SD, Infected Implant Consortium. 2018. A multicenter study of irrigation and debridement in total knee arthroplasty periprosthetic joint infection: treatment failure is high. J Arthroplasty 33:1154–1159. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.11.029. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Hartman MB, Fehring TK, Jordan L, Norton HJ. 1991. Periprosthetic knee sepsis: the role of irrigation and debridement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 273:113–118. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bradbury T, Fehring TK, Taunton M, Hanssen A, Azzam K, Parvizi J, Odum SM. 2009. The fate of acute methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus periprosthetic knee infections treated by open debridement and retention of components. J Arthroplasty 24:101–104. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.04.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Fehring TK, Odum SM, Berend KR, Jiranek WA, Parvizi J, Bozic KJ, Della Valle CJ, Gioe TJ. 2013. Failure of irrigation and debridement for early postoperative periprosthetic infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:250–257. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2373-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Bryan AJ, Abdel MP, Sanders TL, Fitzgerald SF, Hanssen AD, Berry DJ. 2017. Irrigation and debridement with component retention for acute infection after hip arthroplasty: improved results with contemporary management. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99:2011–2018. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.01103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Deirmengian C, Greenbaum J, Lotke PA, Booth RE, Lonner JH, Booth Lonner RE. 2003. Limited success with open debridement and retention of components in the treatment of acute Staphylococcus aureus infections after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 18:22–26. doi: 10.1016/S0883-5403(03)00288-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Marculescu CE, Berbari EF, Hanssen AD, Steckelberg JM, Harmsen SW, Mandrekar JN, Osmon DR. 2006. Outcome of prosthetic joint infections treated with debridement and retention of components. Clin Infect Dis 42:471–478. doi: 10.1086/499234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Mandell JB, Deslouches B, Montelaro RC, Shanks RMQ, Doi Y, Urish KL. 2017. Elimination of antibiotic resistant surgical implant biofilms using an engineered cationic amphipathic peptide WLBU2. Sci Rep 7:18098. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-17780-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Deslouches B, Montelaro RC, Urish KL, Di YP. 2020. Engineered cationic antimicrobial peptides (eCAPs) to combat multidrug-resistant bacteria. Pharmaceutics 12:501. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics12060501. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Parvizi J, Tan TL, Goswami K, Higuera C, Della Valle C, Chen AF, Shohat N. 2018. The 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection: an evidence-based and validated criteria. J Arthroplasty 33:1309–1314. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.078. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Trampuz A, Piper KE, Jacobson MJ, Hanssen AD, Unni KK, Osmon DR, Mandrekar JN, Cockerill FR, Steckelberg JM, Greenleaf JF, Patel R. 2007. Sonication of removed hip and knee prostheses for diagnosis of infection. N Engl J Med 357:654–663. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa061588. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tande A, Patel R. 2014. Prosthetic joint infection. Clin Microbiol Rev 27:302–345. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00111-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Pulido L, Ghanem E, Joshi A, Purtill JJ, Parvizi J. 2008. Periprosthetic joint infection: the incidence, timing, and predisposing factors. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:1710–1715. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0209-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Molina-Manso D, del Prado G, Ortiz-Perez A, Manrubia-Cobo M, Gomez-Barrena E, Cordero-Ampuero J, Esteban J. 2013. In vitro susceptibility to antibiotics of staphylococci in biofilms isolated from orthopaedic infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 41:521–523. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2013.02.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.del Pozo JL, Patel R. 2007. The challenge of treating biofilm-associated bacterial infections. Clin Pharmacol Ther 82:204–209. doi: 10.1038/sj.clpt.6100247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Stoodley P, Nistico L, Johnson S, Lasko LA, Baratz M, Gahlot V, Ehrlich GD, Kathju S. 2008. Direct demonstration of viable Staphylococcus aureus biofilms in an infected total joint arthroplasty. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:1751–1758. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00838. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Microbiology Spectrum are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES