Back to Journals » Infection and Drug Resistance » Volume 15

Association Between Types of Carbapenemase and Clinical Outcomes of Infection Due to Carbapenem Resistance Enterobacterales

Authors Pudpong K , Pattharachayakul S , Santimaleeworagun W, Nwabor NF , Laohaprertthisan V, Hortiwakul T, Charernmak B, Chusri S

Received 25 February 2022

Accepted for publication 3 June 2022

Published 13 June 2022 Volume 2022:15 Pages 3025—3037

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S363588

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Professor Suresh Antony



Korawan Pudpong,1,2 Sutthiporn Pattharachayakul,3 Wichai Santimaleeworagun,4,5 Ozioma F Nwabor,6 Varaporn Laohaprertthisan,7 Thanaporn Hortiwakul,6 Boonsri Charernmak,6 Sarunyou Chusri6

1Department of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacotherapy Thailand, Nontaburi, 11000, Thailand; 2Pharmaceutical Care Unit, Department of Pharmacy, Sunpasitthiprasong Hospital, Ubon Ratchathani, 34000, Thailand; 3Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla, 90110, Thailand; 4Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Silpakorn University, Nakorn Pathom, 73000, Thailand; 5Department of Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Initiative for Resistant Bacteria and Infectious Disease Working Group (PIRBIG), Nakorn Pathom, 73000, Thailand; 6Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, 90110, Songkhla, Thailand; 7Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkla, 90110, Thailand

Correspondence: Sarunyou Chusri, Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, 90110, Songkhla, Thailand, Tel +66 8 973 40446, Fax +66 74451033, Email [email protected]

Purpose: Compared with non-carbapenemase producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (non-CP-CRE), carbapenemase-producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CP-CRE) are associated with considerable mortality. However, given that the patients are treated with various therapeutic options, it remains unclear whether differences in types of carbapenemase genes yield different mortality rates. Therefore, this study aims to identify carbapenemase genes and identify whether clinical outcomes differ according to the prevalence of genotype and phenotype of carbapenemase among Enterobacterales clinical isolated.
Patients and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed to determine whether types of carbapenemase genes have an impact on clinical outcomes. Carbapenem-resistant clinical isolates were collected at a tertiary care university hospital in Songkhla, Thailand, between June 2018 and February 2020. Demographic and microbiological data such as antimicrobial susceptibility, carbapenemase genes, and overall mortality were evaluated.
Results: A total of 121 Enterobacterales clinical isolated were evaluated. The blaNDM-1 gene was detected in 44% of the isolates, followed by blaOXA-48 (28%) and blaNDM-1/OXA-48 (28%). NDM-1- or NDM-1/OXA-48- producing isolates were more likely to require meropenem MICs of ≥ 16 mg/L, while OXA-48-producing isolates were more likely to require meropenem MICs of < 16 mg/L. The patients with NDM-1 or NDM-1/OXA-48 had a higher 14 days mortality rate than those with OXA-48 after treating with carbapenem-containing regimens (P-value 0.001) or colistin-containing regimens (P-value < 0.001).
Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the mortality for CP-CRE infection in patients with NDM-1 or NDM-1/OXA-48 was higher than the mortality in those with OXA-48, which It seems that the type of carbapenemase gene may affect meropenem MIC levels. Hence, in treatment decisions involving the use of either carbapenem-containing regiment or colistin-containing regiment in patients with CP-CRE infection, especially those in the NDM-1 and NDM-1/OXA-48 groups, the patient symptoms should be closely monitored.

Keywords: carbapenemase, carbapenem resistance Enterobacterales, NDM-1, OXA-48, NDM-1/OXA-48

Introduction

The emergence of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) has become a major public health crisis worldwide over the last decade, because of their rapid spread and the lack of development of new antimicrobial drugs.1–3 When found in clinical culture, CRE can represent an infection or colonization. Colonization means that the organism can be found in or on the body but it is not causing any symptoms or disease. Colonizing CRE strains can go on to cause infections or spread to other patients.4

A variety of molecular mechanisms are thought to mediate carbapenem resistance, including the carbapenemase-production, the production of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBLs) and/or AmpC cephalosporinase (AmpC) combined with altered membrane permeability caused by the loss of outer membrane porin or active drug efflux (non-CP-CRE).5,6

There are 3 classes of carbapenemase enzymes, as classified in the Ambler classification. The most common carbapenemases reported from different geographical regions are class A serine beta-lactamases (KPC and GES), class B metallo-beta-lactamases or known as MBLs (NDM, IMP, and VIM), and class D oxacillinase (OXA).1,7,8 The global spread of CRE has occurred involving different epidemic strains across the region.1,8 CRE have been increasingly detected in Southeast Asia, including Thailand.9–11 In Thailand, the main carbapenemase enzymes were MBLs (blaNDM and blaIMP-14) and OXA types.11–13 A recent report from Thailand revealed the two most common genotypes among CRE isolates were blaNDM, of which 95.63% were the blaNDM-1, and blaOXA (blaOXA-48,-181,-232) of 50.22%.13 Furthermore, Paveenkittiporn et al showed data of all the CRE isolates carried mcr genes were 0.3% in 2016–2019.14 The mcr gene has been shown to encode a phosphoethanolamine transferase that alters lipid A in the lipopolysaccharide of the bacterial outer membrane by adding a phosphoethanolamine.15 This reduces the attachment of colistin to the bacterial outer membrane and, therefore, prevents cell lysis. The production of carbapenemase is commonly associated with infection control and increased mortality compared with carbapenem-susceptible strain.16–19 NDM-producers are of particular concern as they also harbor multiple chromosomally and plasmid-encoded resistance genes resulting in a multi-drug-resistant.20,21 NDM can impair the efficacy of almost all beta-lactams (except aztreonam), and the therapeutic options for infection are mostly limited to polymyxin, tigecycline, fosfomycin and cefiderocol,22,23 whereas the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of carbapenems against OXA-48-type producers range between 0.5 and ≥64 mg/L for ertapenem, 1 and ≥64 mg/L for Imipenem, and 1 and ≥64 mg/L for meropenem.24 The OXA-48-type producers with low MICs, categorized as susceptible to carbapenems by the EUCAST and CLSI guidelines.24–26

In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) pointed out that the attributable mortality rate of CRE infection had reached more than 26%.27 Invasive CRE infections have been associated with mortality rates of 40% to 50%.28 Moreover, the mortality was 14% higher in the non-susceptibility to other carbapenems (imipenem, meropenem, or doripenem) Enterobacteriaceae (NSOCE) group compared to the nonsusceptibility to ertapenem alone Enterobacteriaceae (NSEE) group at a tertiary care hospital in Thailand.29

Although many reports demonstrated different kinds of treatment options for CRE infection,1,30–32 the mortality of CRE bloodstream infection was 38.5% in patients receiving appropriate treatment in a retrospective international cohort study conducted in ten countries.33

Since the prevalence of infections due to CRE is expected to increase, screening for carbapenemase-production and the specific type of carbapenemase produced is important to guide treatment decisions. Therefore, we aimed to identify carbapenemase gene in CRE and correlate it with clinical outcomes by the prevalence of genotype and phenotype of carbapenemase among clinical Enterobacterales isolated in Thailand.

Materials and Methods

Study Design and Patients

This retrospective cohort study was performed in patients with CRE infection who were hospitalized at Songklanagarind Hospital in Southern Thailand between June 2018-February 2020. Patient data were collected via chart review and include the following: demographics, preexisting medical conditions, source of infections, microbiological data, antibiotic therapy, and clinical outcome data. Consistent with the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition, CRE was defined as Enterobacterales isolates demonstrating resistance to any carbapenem (ertapenem, meropenem, imipenem, and/or doripenem). Patients were excluded if they were discharged or expired within 3 days of infection onset, which was before the results of antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) were available for the treatment of patients.

This retrospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University with EC: 63-021-14-1 for clinical data from medical record review and microbiological data extraction. The researchers were granted permission to extract the data from the database with waiver of consent. All data were fully anonymized before the researcher accessed and analyzed them. Medical records of patients admitted between 1 June 2018 and 29 February 2020 were used in the study. The author also confirmed that this current study was this study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Inclusion Criteria for the CRE Isolates

CRE isolates were obtained from the clinical Microbiology Laboratory (CML), Songklanagarind Hospital between June 2018 and February 2020. These isolates were collected from different clinical specimens. Duplicate CRE isolates (ie, those of the same species from the same specimen type) from the same patient in the same year were excluded. We studied susceptibility using automated systems or disk diffusion and interpreted it using the 2020 Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) breakpoints for defined CRE isolates.25 The isolates were defined as CRE on the basis of non-susceptibility to any tested carbapenems (ertapenem, imipenem, and meropenem) via susceptibility testing. The Providencia spp., Proteus spp., or Morganella morganii that demonstrated an MIC of >1 µg/mL for imipenem alone were determined by meropenem and ertapenem.

Bacterial Identification and Detection of Carbapenemase Production

The species of 736 CRE isolates were confirmed using Matrix-Assisted Laser-Desorption Ionization Time-of-Flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-ToF MS). The production of carbapenemases in all CRE isolates was determined using a modified carbapenem inactivation method (mCIM) according to CLSI guidelines.25

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

The MICs of amikacin, amoxicillin/clavulanic, aztreonam, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, ceftazidime/avibactam, ciprofloxacin, colistin, gentamicin, ertapenem (concentration range 0.12–2), Imipenem (concentration range 0.5–16), meropenem (concentration rage 0.12–16), piperacillin-tazobactam, tigecycline and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole were evaluated in the CRE isolates using the automated microbroth dilution testing systems (SensitittreTM VizionTM system; ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). However, the susceptibilities to ampicillin, amoxicillin, cefepime, cefoxitin, ceftriaxone and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole were tested using the disk diffusion method, fosfomycin susceptibility was checked using the agar dilution method. All MIC results were interpreted according to the CLSI guidelines.25 and E. coli ATCC 25922TM was used for quality.

Detection of Carbapenemase and Mobilized Colistin Resistance (mcr) Genes

Genomic DNA of all CRE isolates was extracted using the DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kit (QIAGEN, Inc., Valencia, California). The most prevalent carbapenemase genes (eg, blaIMP, blaVIM, blaOXA-48, blaNDM-1, and blaKPC) and the mcr-1 gene were investigated by multiplex PCR using previously reported primers.34,35

Endpoints

The primary outcome was 14-day mortality, with day 1 as the day the first positive culture was collected. Fourteen-day mortality was selected as the primary endpoint, as it was thought to be most reflective of death attributable to CRE infection.

Statistical Methods

Descriptive statistics for patient variables were calculated using mean (standard deviation) or frequency count (percentage), as appropriate. The Pearson x2 test and Fisher’s exact test were used for cells with a frequency of 5 or fewer, for categorical variables. The relationship between variables and outcomes was evaluated using univariable logistic regression, as summarized by odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CIs). Covariates found to have a P-value <0.10 on univariant analysis and resulted in a ≥ 10% change in the parameter estimate of variable were retained in the final multivariable logistic regression models for each outcome. All test was 2-tailed, and P values ≤0.05 were used for statistical significance testing. Analyses were performed using the STATA 16.0 (Stata Corp) statistical package.

Efficacy

Results

Patient Demographics and CRE Characteristics

In this study, all CREs are carbapenemase producers. Demographics and baseline characteristics for patients with CP-CRE infection are summarized in Table 1. Only 121 non-duplicate CP-CRE isolates from the patients with CRE infection that met the study inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and urinary tract infections were the most frequent sites of infection, with 58 (47.9%) and 37 (30.63%) cases, respectively. The highest mortality were found in 20% of the patients with Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and VAP.

Table 1 Demographic and Baseline Characteristics Data of 121 Patients and Clinical Isolates with Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Infections

The most common type of sample was sputum (30.6%) followed by urine (24.8%), blood (23.1%), ascites (12.4%), and others (9.1%). The predominant CP-CRE infection species were Klebsiella spp. (92/121; 76%), E. coli (21/121; 17%) and other Enterobacterales (8/121; 6%).

The majority of CP-CRE isolates carried blaNDM-1 (44%), followed by blaOXA-48 (28%) and blaNDM-1/OXA-48 (28%). Other carbapenemase genes (blaIMP, blaVIM, and blaKPC) and the mcr-1 gene were not identified in these isolates. Overall, the CP-CRE isolates were more likely to require meropenem MICs of >16 mg/L (75.21%) for growth inhibition and colistin MICs of ≥2 mg/L (20.66%). We found that the NDM-1 group was more likely to require meropenem MICs of >16 mg/L (47/121; 88.68%) and colistin MICs of ≥2 (9/121; 16.98%) for growth inhibition. The characteristic of meropenem MIC distribution in the NDM-1/OXA-48 group was similar to that in the NDM-1 group since there were 31 out of 121 isolates (91.18%) which required meropenem MICs of >16 mg/L. In addition, the NDM-1/OXA-48 group had colistin MICs of ≥2 (6/121; 17.65%).

Although most isolates in the OXA-48 group required meropenem MICs of >16 mg/L (13/121; 38.24%), we found that meropenem MIC distribution in this group was more varied than that in NDM-1 and NDM-1/OXA-48 groups as shown in Table 1. The OXA-48 group had colistin MICs of ≥2 mg/L (10/121; 29.41%).

Antimicrobial Susceptibility

A total of 121 strains of CRE from unique patients were isolated. The susceptibility result of antimicrobial is shown in Table 2. Among 121 isolates, the most susceptible agent was amikacin (90% for NDM-1, 97.1% for OXA-48, and 97.1% for NDM-1/OXA-48). However, we found that all CP-CRE groups had MIC90 of 16 mg/L, which is a borderline of amikacin MIC cutoff value. Tigecycline had a good susceptibility to CP-CRE and was second only to amikacin. The susceptible rates to NDM-1, OXA-48, and NDM-1/OXA-48 are 93.6%, 80.7%, and 82.29%, respectively. For Beta-lactams, all CP-CRE groups were not susceptible to ertapenem and ceftazidime, except for OXA-48 (susceptibility rate of 5.88%). NDM-1 (1.9%) and NDM-1/OXA-48 (2.94%) had low susceptibility to meropenem and imipenem.

Table 2 Antimicrobial Susceptibility in CP-CRE Producing NDM-1, OXA-48 or NDM-1/OXA-48

Ceftazidime/Avibactam showed susceptibility rate of 70.6% for OXA-48. However, ceftazidime-avibactam was susceptible to NDM-1 type for 3.77% and to NDM-1/OXA-48 type for 2.94%. Among these isolates, colistin MIC ≤ 2 mg/L, which was interpreted as intermediate susceptibility, exhibited susceptibility rate of 90.6% for NDM-1 and 85.3% for NDM-1/OXA-48, whereas the susceptibility rate of colistin to OXA-48 was only 79.4%.

The NDM-1 and NDM-1/OXA-48 isolates were more likely to require meropenem MICs of ≥16 mg/L for growth inhibition, while the OXA-48 isolates were more likely to require meropenem MICs of <16 mg/L.

Clinical Outcomes and Risk Factors Associated with the 14-Day Mortality

Among 121 patients with CP-CRE infection, a total of 40 (33%) patients died within 14 days. In this study, most patients were mainly treated with combination therapy. All patients were treated with currently standard doses of drugs and adjusted according to creatinine clearance for patients with chronic kidney disease.36–38 The regimens in this medical treatment had at least one active antibiotic based on in-vitro susceptibility testing. However, the antibacterial activities of some regimens in the study had some overlap. The most overlap was detected in meropenem combined colistin (24%). Additionally, 19 patients (15.7%) received active monotherapy treatment based on in-vitro susceptibility testing. These patients were usually diagnosed with UTI. We found mortality in only 2 patients who received active monotherapy treatment. Overall, there was no significant difference in the mortality outcomes of patients with CP-CRE infection using different antimicrobial agents. However, in the analysis of differences in specific carbapenemase genes, we compared 2 patient groups, the NDM-1 with NDM-1/OXA-48 and OXA-48 to differentiate MBLs and non-metallo-beta-lactamases (non-MBLs). The analysis suggested that patients in the NDM-1 with NDM-1/OXA-48 groups have a higher mortality rate using either carbapenem-containing regiment or colistin-containing regiment than those in the OXA-48 groups (Table 3). The univariate analysis results revealed statistically significant risk factors, whereas the multivariate analysis indicated that, only Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score ≥15 (odds ratio (OR) 4.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00–20.03), and Meropenem MIC ≥16 (OR 8.40, 95% CI 1.71–41.18) were significant predictors for death (Table 4).

Table 3 Outcome of Patients with Different Carbapenemase-Producing-CRE According to Treatment Regimens

Table 4 Factors Associated with an All-Cause 14-Day Mortality of 121 Patients with CP-CRE Infections

Discussion

In this study, the most common type of sample was sputum followed by urine, blood, ascites, and others. The predominant CRE infection species were Klebsiella spp. Meropenem was selected as a representative of the carbapenem class since, compared with other medications in the class, this medication was frequently to treat patients with CP-CRE infection. The results suggest that patients with CP-CRE harboring NDM-1 or NDM-1 combined OXA-48 were more likely to require meropenem MICs of ≥16 mg/L for growth inhibition, while the OXA-48 group was more likely to require meropenem MICs of ≤16 mg/L. Infection types of most patients in this study were VAP and UTI. We found that the highest mortality was found in 20% of the patients with HAP and VAP. Overall, there was no significant difference in the mortality outcomes of patients with CP-CRE infection treated with different antimicrobial agents. However, the analysis of differences in specific carbapenemase genes, compared 2 patient groups, namely, NDM-1 with NDM-1/OXA-48 and OXA-48 to differentiate MBLs and non-MBLs. The analysis suggested that patients in the NDM-1 with NDM-1 combined OXA-48 group had a higher mortality rate to either carbapenem-containing regiment or colistin-containing regiment than those in the OXA-48 group.

In this study, we found that 17 isolates (14%) of CRE were not susceptible to colistin (MIC>2). However, 11 patients were still treated with colistin-based regimen even CRE isolates were not susceptible to colistin. We searched for mechanism of colistin resistance by using detection of mcr genes, since these genes are related to colistin resistance. However, in the study, we did not find mcr-1 genes in all CP-CRE isolates, possibly due to NDM-1 and OXA-48 types of carbapenemase. These gene types caused crrB gene transformation which resulted in colistin resistance, since there was a modification in lipopolysaccharide of the outer membrane of gram-negative bacteria.39 Other gene types such as mgrB could be the cause,40,41 however, we did not include them in our study.

The result indicated that patients with APACHE II score ≥15 had about 4 times the odds of mortality within 14 days after the severity of illness on day 1 of CRE infection has been accounted for. The CP-CRE with meropenem MIC ≥ 16 had about 8 times the odds of mortality within 14 days after antibiotic treatment was administered.

This finding suggests that CP-CRE isolates, especially MBLs, are of particular concern about medical treatment rather than those in non-MBLs group since meropenem MICs of ≥16 mg/L were identified in NDM-1 and NDM-1/OXA-48 groups. In addition, the study suggests that, regardless of whether carbapenem-containing regiment or colistin-containing regiment was used, the mortality rate was high.

Previous studies have demonstrated mortality from CRE infection ranging from approximately 20% to 70%. Moreover, many studies have evaluated the risk factors related to bloodstream infections with multidrug-resistant Enterobacterales. For example, Carbapenemase-production, bacteremia, Pitt bacteremia score ≥4, polymyxin therapy administered, and APACHE-II score ≥15 have been considered independent risk factors for CRE infections.19,42,43

Although new medications such as ceftazidime-avibactam, meropenem-vaborbactam, imipenem-cilastatin-relebactam, and cefiderocol are employed to treat CRE, epidemiological data, especially genotypes, should be considered when making treatment decisions regarding these medications. Several previous studies have attempted to test for the most appropriate treatment option for CRE infection.44–47 However, due to the differences in factors influencing outcomes, those studies do not provide similar outcomes possibly. As a result, at present, there are no clear conclusions on the optimal medicine for the treatment of CRE. In addition, the previous studies are limited, since no description of the mechanism of carbapenem resistance is included and genotypic identification especially MBLs predominates. Moreover, only a few studies have investigated this; thus, additional data gathering is required to achieve better treatment outcomes.

The distribution of carbapenemase genes in Thailand also differs from those from other parts of the world. The most common genes were blaNDM-1, blaIMP-14, and blaOXA, regardless of the organism.11–13,48 These results support previous studies, showing that NDM is the most common gene in South and Southeast Asia.1,48,49 However, the results differ from the United States, the most commonly identified carbapenemase is KPC.1,49

To our knowledge, this is the first study that has correlated clinical outcomes to the genotype and phenotype of carbapenemase genes among clinical Enterobacterales isolated. With regard to treatment options using either carbapenem-containing regimens or colistin-containing regimens, certain isolates demonstrated colistin MIC of ≤2. However, the appropriate dosage regimens needed to achieve adequate plasma concentrations were colistin MIC of 1–2 mg/L. Moreover, the 14 days mortality rate in patients with NDM-1 or NDM-1/OXA-48 was higher than the rate in those with OXA-48. Although the bacteria were susceptible to aminoglycoside and tigecycline, using these medications in the treatment did not yield different mortality outcomes among the different genotypes.

Ceftazidime-avibactam has previously demonstrated in vitro activities against non-MBL, including isolates that carry AmpC and ESBL enzymes.50,51 However, in this study only the presence of the MBL gene, NDM-1, and NDM-1 combined with OXA-48, were associated with in vitro resistance to ceftazidime-avibactam. In addition, 70.5% of OXA-48-producing isolates were susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam. The current study identified 10 (29.5%) OXA-48 producing CP-CRE isolates with reduced ceftazidime-avibactam susceptibility. However, the patients in the current study did not receive ceftazidime-avibactam treatment. The mechanism of reduced susceptibility has not been determined for those isolates but might be attributable to changes in porin or penicillin-binding protein or the presence of avibactam-insensitive beta-lactamases that were not detected by the current testing.

In this study, all CREs are carbapenemase producers, and we found a total of 40 (33%) patients died within 14 days, which is considered as high mortality rate. Thus, we hold the view that in addition to submitting specimens for bacterium identified and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, which is a lab routine activity, carbapenemase detection test should also be combined. At the present time, CP-CRE can be detected in both genotypic and phenotypic carbapenemase detection tests. When that the specimen arrives in the lab or a blood culture broth becomes positive. When the specimens are delivered to the lab or a blood culture broth becomes positive, genotypic carbapenemase detection test takes one day or usually within 2 hours to get the result. Alternatively, phenotypic carbapenemase test can also be used to detect CP-CRE such as mCIM or EDTA-modified carbapenem inactivation method (eCIM), which affords the differentiation of serine and MBLs. This test could be helpful in making therapeutic decisions. In our view, the acknowledgement that patient had a CP-CRE could lead to a more effective treatment and to a use of antimicrobial agents (eg ceftazidime-avibactam, ceftazidime-avibactam plus aztreonam, and cefiderocol etc.) for certain classes of carbapenemases. These agents could be administered almost immediately when a particular carbapenemase is identified.

There are several limitations to this work. Firstly, the limited sample size could impact the analysis of risk factors for mortality. Hence, the risk factors reported in the study might not represent the true or complete range of factors. Secondly, the patients were from a single center in Thailand where carbapenemase genes mainly blaNDM-1 and blaOXA-48 predominate, and differs from those in other regions of the world where blaKPC predominate. Third, we did not evaluate the contribution of the major OMPs to CRE isolates which could cause increased the carbapenem MIC in this study.

Finally, this study is a retrospective study in which we could not provide a clear explanation of rationale in the case of clinical judgment.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the study suggests that the consideration of microbial characteristics may have an important role in making treatment decisions and in treatment of disease with variability in genes. Thus, we suggest that in treatment decisions involving the use of either carbapenem-containing regiment (especially when meropenem MICs of ≥ 16) or colistin-containing regiment in patients with CP-CRE infection, especially those in the NDM-1 and both NDM-1 and OXA-48 groups, the patient symptoms should be closely monitored.

Acknowledgments

We thank Thermo Fisher scientific, Thailand for microplate support. We are grateful to Laohaprertthisan Varaporn, Ingviya Natnicha, and Hortiwakul Thanaporn for their excellent technical assistance.

Funding

This work was supported by the Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, and Docter Kasem Pangsrivongse Foundation. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in relation to this work.

References

1. van Duin D, Doi Y. The global epidemiology of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Virulence. 2017;8(4):460–469. doi:10.1080/21505594.2016.1222343

2. Nordmann P, Dortet L, Poirel L. Carbapenem resistance in Enterobacteriaceae: here is the storm! Trends Mol Med. 2012;18(5):263–272. doi:10.1016/j.molmed.2012.03.003

3. Tilahun M, Kassa Y, Gedefie A, Ashagire M. Emerging carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infection, its epidemiology and novel treatment options: a review. Infect Drug Resist. 2021;14:4363–4374. doi:10.2147/IDR.S337611

4. CDC. Clinicians: information about CRE; 2019. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/hai/organisms/cre/cre-clinicians.html. Accessed June 3, 2022.

5. Livingstone D, Gill MJ, Wise R. Mechanisms of resistance to the carbapenems. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1995;35(1):1–5. doi:10.1093/jac/35.1.1

6. Ruppé É, Woerther P-L, Barbier F. Mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance in Gram-negative bacilli. Ann Intensive Care. 2015;5(1):61. doi:10.1186/s13613-015-0061-0

7. Yigit H, Queenan AM, Anderson GJ, et al. Novel carbapenem-hydrolyzing beta-lactamase, KPC-1, from a carbapenem-resistant strain of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45(4):1151–1161. doi:10.1128/AAC.45.4.1151-1161.2001

8. Temkin E, Adler A, Lerner A, Carmeli Y. Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae: biology, epidemiology, and management. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2014;1323(1):22–42. doi:10.1111/nyas.12537

9. Suwantarat N, Carroll KC. Epidemiology and molecular characterization of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria in Southeast Asia. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2016;5(1):15. doi:10.1186/s13756-016-0115-6

10. Lunha K, Chanawong A, Lulitanond A, et al. High-level carbapenem-resistant OXA-48-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae with a novel OmpK36 variant and low-level, carbapenem-resistant, non-porin-deficient, OXA-181-producing Escherichia coli from Thailand. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016;85(2):221–226. doi:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2016.03.009

11. Netikul T, Kiratisin P, Nguyen MH. Genetic characterization of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and the spread of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumonia ST340 at a University Hospital in Thailand. PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0139116. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0139116

12. Rimrang B, Chanawong A, Lulitanond A, et al. Emergence of NDM-1- and IMP-14a-producing Enterobacteriaceae in Thailand. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(11):2626–2630. doi:10.1093/jac/dks267

13. Laolerd W, Akeda Y, Preeyanon L, Ratthawongjirakul P, Santanirand P. Carbapenemase-producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae from Bangkok, Thailand, and their detection by the carba NP and modified carbapenem inactivation method tests. Microb Drug Resist. 2018;24(7):1006–1011. doi:10.1089/mdr.2018.0080

14. Paveenkittiporn W, Kamjumphol W, Ungcharoen R, Kerdsin A. Whole-genome sequencing of clinically isolated carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales harboring mcr genes in Thailand, 2016–2019. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:586368. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.586368

15. Gharaibeh MH, Shatnawi SQ. An overview of colistin resistance, mobilized colistin resistance genes dissemination, global responses, and the alternatives to colistin: a review. Vet World. 2019;12(11):1735–1746. doi:10.14202/vetworld.2019.1735-1746

16. Wang Q, Zhang Y, Yao X, et al. Risk factors and clinical outcomes for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae nosocomial infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016;35(10):1679–1689. doi:10.1007/s10096-016-2710-0

17. Goodman KE, Simner PJ, Tamma PD, Milstone AM. Infection control implications of heterogeneous resistance mechanisms in carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2016;14(1):95–108. doi:10.1586/14787210.2016.1106940

18. Martin A, Fahrbach K, Zhao Q, Lodise T. Association between carbapenem resistance and mortality among adult, hospitalized patients with serious infections due to Enterobacteriaceae: results of a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018;5(7):ofy150. doi:10.1093/ofid/ofy150

19. Tamma PD, Goodman KE, Harris AD, et al. Comparing the outcomes of patients with carbapenemase-producing and non-carbapenemase-producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;64(3):257–264. doi:10.1093/cid/ciw741

20. Liang Z, Li L, Wang Y, et al. Molecular basis of NDM-1, a new antibiotic resistance determinant. PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23606. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023606

21. Livermore DM, Mushtaq S, Warner M, et al. Activity of aminoglycosides, including ACHN-490, against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(1):48–53. doi:10.1093/jac/dkq408

22. Falagas ME, Maraki S, Karageorgopoulos DE, Kastoris AC, Mavromanolakis E, Samonis G. Antimicrobial susceptibility of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Enterobacteriaceae isolates to fosfomycin. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2010;35(3):240–243. doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2009.10.019

23. Zhanel GG, Golden AR, Zelenitsky S, et al. Cefiderocol: a siderophore cephalosporin with activity against carbapenem-resistant and multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacilli. Drugs. 2019;79(3):271–289. doi:10.1007/s40265-019-1055-2

24. Poirel L, Potron A, Nordmann P. OXA-48-like carbapenemases: the phantom menace. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(7):1597–1606. doi:10.1093/jac/dks121

25. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; Twenty-Nine Informational Supplement. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; CLSI document M100. 2020.

26. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. European Antimicrobial Breakpoints. Basel: European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; 2020.

27. Tacconelli E, Carrara E, Savoldi A, et al. Discovery, research, and development of new antibiotics: the WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(3):318–327. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30753-3

28. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Facility guidance for control of Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE): November 2015 update - CRE toolkit; 2015. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/hai/pdfs/cre/cre-guidance-508.pdf. Accessed June 7, 2022.

29. Chotiprasitsakul D, Srichatrapimuk S, Kirdlarp S, Pyden AD, Santanirand P. Epidemiology of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae: a 5-year experience at a tertiary care hospital. Infect Drug Resist. 2019;12:461–468. doi:10.2147/IDR.S192540

30. Ranjan A, Shaik S, Mondal A, et al. Molecular epidemiology and genome dynamics of New Delhi metallo-β-lactamase-producing extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli strains from India. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(11):6795–6805. doi:10.1128/AAC.01345-16

31. Logan LK, Weinstein RA. The epidemiology of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae: the impact and evolution of a global menace. J Infect Dis. 2017;215(suppl_1):S28–S36. doi:10.1093/infdis/jiw282

32. Ontong JC, Ozioma NF, Voravuthikunchai SP, Chusri S. Synergistic antibacterial effects of colistin in combination with aminoglycoside, carbapenems, cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones, tetracyclines, fosfomycin, and piperacillin on multidrug resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates. PLoS One. 2021;16(1):e0244673. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0244673

33. Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez B, Salamanca E, de Cueto M, et al. Effect of appropriate combination therapy on mortality of patients with bloodstream infections due to carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (INCREMENT): a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(7):726–734. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30228-1

34. Preechachuawong P, Santimaleeworagun W, Jitwasinkul T, Samret W. Detection of New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase-1-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae at a general hospital in Thailand. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2015;46(6):1031–1036.

35. Liu YY, Wang Y, Walsh TR, et al. Emergence of plasmid-mediated colistin resistance mechanism MCR-1 in animals and human beings in China: a microbiological and molecular biological study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(2):161–168. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00424-7

36. Kaye KS, Rice LB, Dane AL, et al. Fosfomycin for injection (ZTI-01) versus Piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection including acute pyelonephritis: ZEUS, a Phase 2/3 randomized trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;69(12):2045–2056. doi:10.1093/cid/ciz181

37. American Pharmacists Association. Drug Information Handbook: With International Trade Names Index. 28th ed. Hudson, Ohio: Lexi-Comp; 2019–2020.

38. American Pharmacists Association. Drug Information Handbook: With International Trade Names Index. 26th ed. Hudson, Ohio: Lexi-Comp; 2017–2018.

39. Jayol A, Nordmann P, Brink A, Villegas M-V, Dubois V, Poirel L. High-level resistance to colistin mediated by various mutations in the crrB gene among carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(11):e01423–17. doi:10.1128/AAC.01423-17

40. Olaitan AO, Diene SM, Kempf M, et al. Worldwide emergence of colistin resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae from healthy humans and patients in Lao PDR, Thailand, Israel, Nigeria and France owing to inactivation of the PhoP/PhoQ regulator mgrB: an epidemiological and molecular study. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2014;44(6):500–507. doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2014.07.020

41. Giani T, Arena F, Vaggelli G, et al. Large nosocomial outbreak of colistin-resistant, Carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae traced to clonal expansion of an mgrB deletion mutant. J Clin Microbiol. 2015;53(10):3341–3344. doi:10.1128/JCM.01017-15

42. Lim FK, Liew YX, Cai Y, et al. Treatment and outcomes of infections caused by diverse carbapenemase-producing Carbapenem-resistant enterobacterales. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2020;10:542. doi:10.3389/fcimb.2020.579462

43. Tumbarello M, Trecarichi EM, De Rosa FG, et al. Infections caused by KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae: differences in therapy and mortality in a multicentre study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70(7):2133–2143. doi:10.1093/jac/dkv086

44. Nichols WW, de Jonge BL, Kazmierczak KM, Karlowsky JA, Sahm DF. In vitro susceptibility of global surveillance isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to ceftazidime-avibactam (INFORM 2012 to 2014). Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(8):4743–4749. doi:10.1128/AAC.00220-16

45. Nasomsong W, Nulsopapon P, Changpradub D, et al. The potential use of ceftazidime-avibactam against Carbapenem resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae clinical isolates harboring different carbapenemase types in a Thai University Hospital. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2021;15:3095–3104. doi:10.2147/DDDT.S321147

46. Ko W-C, Stone GG. In vitro activity of ceftazidime–avibactam and comparators against Gram-negative bacterial isolates collected in the Asia–Pacific region as part of the INFORM program (2015–2017). Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2020;19(1):14. doi:10.1186/s12941-020-00355-1

47. Tamma PD, Aitken SL, Bonomo RA, Mathers AJ, van Duin D, Clancy CJ. Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidance on the treatment of extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing enterobacterales (ESBL-E), carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), and pseudomonas aeruginosa with difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR-P. aeruginosa). Clin Infect Dis. 2021;72(7):e169–e83. doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa1478

48. Paveenkittiporn W, Lyman M, Biedron C, et al. Molecular epidemiology of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales in Thailand, 2016–2018. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2021;10(1):88. doi:10.1186/s13756-021-00950-7

49. Hansen GT. Continuous evolution: perspective on the epidemiology of carbapenemase resistance among Enterobacterales and other gram-negative bacteria. Infect Dis Ther. 2021;10(1):75–92. doi:10.1007/s40121-020-00395-2

50. Wong D, van Duin D. Novel beta-lactamase inhibitors: unlocking their potential in therapy. Drugs. 2017;77(6):615–628. doi:10.1007/s40265-017-0725-1

51. van Duin D, Bonomo RA. Ceftazidime/avibactam and ceftolozane/tazobactam: second-generation β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63(2):234–241. doi:10.1093/cid/ciw243

52. Nation RL, Garonzik SM, Thamlikitkul V, et al. Dosing guidance for intravenous colistin in critically-ill patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;64(5):565–571. doi:10.1093/cid/ciw839

Creative Commons License © 2022 The Author(s). This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.