Assessment of the Susceptibility of Clinical Gram-Negative and Gram-Positive Bacterial Strains to Fosfomycin and Significance of This Antibiotic in Infection Treatment

Abstract

Multidrug resistance of bacteria has prompted intensive development work on new medicines, but also the search for effective options among the oldest antibiotics. Although intravenous fosfomycin (IVFOS) seems to be an interesting proposal, the recommended agar dilution method for susceptibility determination poses a major problem in routine diagnostic testing. As a consequence, there is a lack of comprehensive data on the frequency of isolation of susceptible or resistant strains. This fact triggered the disposition of EUCAST concerning the revision of IVFOS breakpoints (BPs), including withdrawal of BPs for Enterobacterales (excluding E. coli) and coagulase-negative staphylococci. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the activity of fosfomycin against numerous clinical strains using recommended methods. Materials and methods: A total of 997 bacterial strains were tested from the following genera: Enterobacterales, Pseudomonas spp., Staphylococcus spp., Acinetobacter spp., and Enterococcus spp., for which there are currently no BPs. The strains were isolated from various clinical materials from patients hospitalized in five hospitals. During the investigation, the recommended agar dilution method was used. Susceptibility to other antibiotics and resistance mechanisms were determined using an automatic method (Phoenix) the disk diffusion method, and E-tests. MIC values of fosfomycin were estimated for all strains and for susceptible and multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains individually. Results: Except for Acinetobacter and Enterococcus, 83% of the strains were susceptible to IVFOS, including the largest percentage of S. aureus and E. coli. Klebsiella spp. turned out to be the least susceptible strains (66%). The highest proportion of susceptibility to fosfomycin was found among strains that were sensitive to other antibiotics (80.9%), and the lowest was found among Gram-negative carbapenemase-producing bacteria (55.6%) and ESBL+ bacteria (61.6%). The MIC evaluation revealed the lowest MIC₅₀ and MIC₉₀ values for S. aureus (0.5 mg/L and 1 mg/L, respectively) and E. coli (4 mg/L and 32 mg/L, respectively). The highest values of MIC₅₀ were found for Acinetobacter spp. (256 mg/L), while the highest values of MIC₉₀ were found for Acinetobacter spp. and Klebsiella spp. (256 mg/L and 512 mg/L, respectively). Conclusions: IVFOS appears to be suitable for the treatment of many infections, including the empirical treatment of polymicrobial infections and those caused by MDR strains, since the sensitivity of the studied strains to this antibiotic in different groups ranged from 66% to as much as 99%. Sensitivity to fosfomycin was also demonstrated by 60% of carbapenem-resistant strains; therefore, IVFOS is one of the few therapeutic options that can be effective against the most resistant Gram-negative rods. In light of the general consultation posted by EUCAST, obtaining data such as IVFOS MIC value distributions may be vital for the decision of implementing fosfomycin into breakpoint tables.

Keywords: Gram-positive and Gram-negative strains; IV fosfomycin; agar dilution method; in vitro susceptibility; multidrug-resistant strains.

Figure 1

Distribution of MIC values of fosfomycin for total Enterobacterales (A), Klebsiella spp. (B), E. coli (C), and Enterobacter spp. (D).

Figure 2

Distribution of MIC values of fosfomycin for P. aeruginosa.

Figure 3

Distribution of MIC values of fosfomycin for Acinetobacter spp.

Figure 4

Distribution of MIC values of fosfomycin for total Staphylococcus spp. (A), S. aureus (B), and coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CNS) (C).

Figure 5

Distribution of MIC values of fosfomycin for total Enterococcus spp. (A), and separately for E. faecalis (B) and E. faecium (C).