Skip Navigation


JAC Advance Access originally published online on March 10, 2006
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2006 57(5):1012-1014; doi:10.1093/jac/dkl043
This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
57/5/1012    most recent
dkl043v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Livermore, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Potz, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Livermore, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Potz, N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Correspondence

Activity of temocillin against prevalent ESBL- and AmpC-producing Enterobacteriaceae from south-east England

David M. Livermore1,*, Russell Hope1, Elizabeth J. Fagan1, Marina Warner1, Neil Woodford1 and Nicola Potz2

1 Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring and Reference Laboratory, Centre for Infections, Health Protection Agency, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, UK; 2 Healthcare-Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance Department, Centre for Infections, Health Protection Agency, 61 Colindale Avenue, London NW9 5EQ, UK


* Corresponding author. Tel: +44-20-8327-7223; Fax +44-20-8327-6264; E-mail: david.livermore{at}hpa.org.uk

Keywords: {alpha}-methoxy penicillin , ß-lactamases , Escherichia coli , Klebsiella spp.

Sir,

Temocillin is the 6-{alpha}-methoxy derivative of ticarcillin. This modification increases stability to ß-lactamases, including AmpC and extended-spectrum types, but reduces activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and removes affinity for the essential penicillin-binding proteins of Gram-positive bacteria and Bacteroides spp., giving a narrow-spectrum agent with very consistent activity against Enterobacteriaceae.1 Temocillin was marketed by Beecham Pharmaceuticals in the UK in the 1980s but achieved little commercial success and was withdrawn, though it remained available via the manufacturer's medical department. It continued to be marketed in Belgium, where it has been widely used in microbiologically directed therapy against infections known to be caused by pathogens with potent ß-lactamases.

Presently licensed to Eumedica, temocillin is being re-launched in the UK, and we assessed its activity against current ESBL-producing and AmpC-hyperproducing Enterobacteriaceae. The isolates used were from a recent survey of cephalosporin resistance in London and south-east England.2 They were consecutively collected Enterobacteriaceae found resistant at hospital Trust laboratories to one or more of cefpodoxime, cefotaxime and ceftazidime. MICs were determined centrally using the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC) method3 and isolates were further characterized by a combination of interpretative reading4 and multiplex PCRs for blaCTX-M and acquired blaAmpC genes,5,6 and with a single PCR to identify members of Escherichia coli strain A, a particularly prevalent clone with blaCTX-M-15 linked to an IS26 element.7

In total, 846 survey isolates were tested with temocillin (see Table 1). These comprised (i) isolates with ESBL phenotypes, positive or not for blaCTX-M; (ii) isolates with AmpC phenotypes, with chromosomal or acquired (mostly blaCIT in E. coli) types and (iii) Klebsiella oxytoca inferred to hyperproduce K1 enzyme on the basis of high-level resistance to cefuroxime and aztreonam but retained susceptibility to ceftazidime. We cannot exclude the possibility that some isolates had additional mechanisms beyond those inferred or found. In particular, we are aware that some of the AmpC-derepressed enterobacters have blaSHV-12, although little or no cefepime/clavulanate synergy was apparent (M. J. Ellington, Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring and Reference Laboratory, Centre for Infections, personal communication). Apart from identifying members of E. coli strain A, we did not investigate the clonality of the collection; nevertheless, they were from 16 sites, with a cap of 100 isolates per site, limiting the distortions that could arise from multiple inclusion of outbreak strains. We also tested 13 non-survey Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates with resistance to ertapenem (MICs ≥ 8 mg/L) and reduced susceptibility or resistance to meropenem (MICs 4–16 mg/L; less so to imipenem: MICs 1–8 mg/L) arising via combinations of CTX-M ESBLs and loss of porins and/or up-regulated efflux. We are receiving small but increasing numbers of such isolates via the national reference service, although they remain too rare to register in surveillance studies.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1.. MIC distributions of temocillin for ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceaea

 
Temocillin MICs were determined using the BSAC agar dilution method, except that those for the carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae were determined using Etest (AB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden) on Iso-Sensitest agar (Oxoid, Basingstoke, Hants, UK).

MIC distributions for groups of survey isolates are shown in Table 1. Modal values for AmpC and ESBL producers for all major species groups were 8 mg/L, identical to the values for the E. coli ATCC 25922 control, which is ampicillin-susceptible, and to E. coli ATCC 35218, which has only a classical TEM-1 ß-lactamase. More than 88% of the AmpC- and ESBL-producing survey isolates were susceptible to temocillin at ≤16 mg/L and 99% at ≤32 mg/L. The susceptibility distribution for E. coli strain A, a CTX-M-15 ß-lactamase-producing clone that is nationally widespread and locally dominant,7 mirrored this pattern: 79 strain A isolates were included, and, again, the modal MIC was 8 mg/L, with just three requiring MICs of 32 mg/L. Among the 13 ertapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae, 11 required temocillin MICs of 32 or 64 mg/L; the remaining two were more susceptible, suggesting that, as with the carbapenems, temocillin is vulnerable to the combination of ESBL and impermeability present in these organisms.

It remains to relate the temocillin MICs to attainable levels and outcome data in the absence of a BSAC or EUCAST breakpoint. One recent open-label Belgian study describes clinically successful use of temocillin in 25 of 26 patients with urinary infections caused by multiresistant Enterobacter aerogenes, of which most were ESBL producers.8 Temocillin achieves urinary levels of 400–600 mg/L, suggesting a considerable margin over the MICs.9 More generally, a susceptibility breakpoint of ≤16 mg/L is used for systemic isolates in Belgium, based on a Cmax of 160 mg/L and t1/2 of 5 h from a 1 g intravenous dose, along with 85% serum binding.9 This indicates quite a narrow therapeutic margin for Enterobacteriaceae—whether ESBL-producing or not—outside the urinary tract. Nevertheless, six of the seven patients with sepsis caused by multiresistant E. aerogenes were cured in the Belgian study,8 although its authors note that these were cases with ‘less severe’ sepsis, and that carbapenems were preferred for more severe cases.

We conclude that temocillin retains good in vitro activity against most current isolates of Enterobacteriaceae with ESBLs or hyperproduced or acquired AmpC, and also against K. oxytoca with hyperproduced K1 enzyme. It is a potential alternative to carbapenems against the growing number of infections, particularly those of the urinary tract, that are caused by ESBL producers and other cephalosporin-resistant strains.

Transparency declarations

None to declare.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Belpharma for financial support.

References

1. Spencer RC. Temocillin. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 26: 735–7.[Free Full Text]

2. Potz N, Hope R, Warner M et al. CTX-M-producing Escherichia coli now the dominant cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacteriaceae in London and SE England. In: Abstracts of the Fifteenth European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2005. Abstract O-206. Clin Microbiol Infect 2005; 11 Suppl 2: 48.

3. Andrews JM. BSAC standardized disc susceptibility testing method (version 4). J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 56: 60–76.[Free Full Text]

4. Livermore DM, Winstanley TG, Shannon KP. Interpretative reading: recognising the unusual and inferring resistance mechanisms from resistance phenotypes. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001; 48: 87–102.[Abstract]

5. Woodford N, Fagan EJ, Ellington MJ. Multiplex PCR for rapid detection of genes encoding CTX-M extended-spectrum ß-lactamases. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006; 57: 154–5.[Free Full Text]

6. Perez-Perez FJ, Hanson ND. Detection of plasmid-mediated AmpC ß-lactamase genes in clinical isolates by using multiplex PCR. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40: 2153–62.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

7. Woodford N, Ward ME, Kaufmann ME et al. Community and hospital spread of Escherichia coli producing CTX-M extended-spectrum ß-lactamases in the UK. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 54: 735–43.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

8. Frankard J, Byl B, Rodriguez-Villalobos H et al. Clinical presentation and outcome of multi-resistant Enterobacter aerogenes infections: a review of 116 episodes. In: Abstracts of the Fourteenth European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Prague, Czech Republic, 2004. Abstract P-1358. Clin Microbiol Infect 2004; 10 Suppl 3: 379.

9. Slocombe B, Basker MJ, Bentley PH et al. BRL 17421, a novel ß-lactam antibiotic, highly resistant to ß-lactamases, giving high and prolonged serum levels in humans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1981; 20: 38–46.[Abstract/Free Full Text]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
J. M. Adams-Haduch, B. A. Potoski, H. E. Sidjabat, D. L. Paterson, and Y. Doi
Activity of Temocillin against KPC-Producing Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., June 1, 2009; 53(6): 2700 - 2701.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
H. Rodriguez-Villalobos, A. Cardentey-Reyes, C. Thiroux, C. Nonhoff, and M. J. Struelens
Comparison of four commercial methods for determining temocillin susceptibility of Escherichia coli
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., April 1, 2009; 63(4): 832 - 834.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
D. M. Livermore and P. M. Tulkens
Temocillin revived
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., February 1, 2009; 63(2): 243 - 245.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Microbiol. Rev.Home page
G. A. Jacoby
AmpC {beta}-Lactamases
Clin. Microbiol. Rev., January 1, 2009; 22(1): 161 - 182.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
R. De Jongh, R. Hens, V. Basma, J. W. Mouton, P. M. Tulkens, and S. Carryn
Continuous versus intermittent infusion of temocillin, a directed spectrum penicillin for intensive care patients with nosocomial pneumonia: stability, compatibility, population pharmacokinetic studies and breakpoint selection
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., February 1, 2008; 61(2): 382 - 388.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
J. M. Andrews, G. Jevons, R. Walker, J. Ashby, and A. P. Fraise
Temocillin susceptibility by BSAC methodology
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., July 1, 2007; 60(1): 185 - 187.
[Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Extract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
57/5/1012    most recent
dkl043v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Livermore, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Potz, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Livermore, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Potz, N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?