he New England Journal of Medicine is not much given to sensationalism; nor is the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. It comes as a surprise, therefore, to find at the end of the paper currently ranked at #11, from the Glycopeptide-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus Working Group (T.L. Smith, et al., New Engl. J. Med., 340: 493-501, 1999; with 15 citations this period and 81 overall), the following statement: "The emergence of S. aureus with intermediate glycopeptide resistance threatens to return us to the era before the development of antibiotics." Why the alarm? Victory over bacterial pathogens tends to be short-lived. They acquired resistance to penicillin, when that drug was introduced in the 1940s. When the semisynthetic penicillins arrived in the 1960s it was not long before staphylococcal resistance emerged, and for the past 15 years MRSA (methicillin-resistant S. aureus) has been troubling hospital services all over the world. The major treatment for MRSA infection has been vancomycin, a glycopeptide class antibiotic. Four years ago, reduced susceptibility to vancomycin was recorded in Japan. In the summer of 1997 the first two U.S. cases were diagnosed, and paper #11 is the result. This article is part of a continuing story of bacterial resistance. I can recall the alarm bells ringing in the 1960s when the first strains of penicillin-resistant pneumococcus (Streptococcus pneumoniae) were reported. Subsequently a new class of antibiotic, the fluoroquinolones (drugs terminating in "-ofloxacin"), began to be quite commonly used for this bacterial pneumonia. In Canada prescription of fluoroquinolones rose seven-fold between 1988 and 1997; and the prevalence of pneumococci with reduced susceptibility to fluoroquinolones has been rising too (#8). Once a bacterium has acquired an antibiotic-resistance gene there is the potential for the gene to jump across to other species, and this has been recorded. Patient-to-patient spread of a non-responsive pathogen, within a hospital or between hospitals, is another danger with MRSA. The New Jersey and Michigan patients (#11) died. However, there was no cross-infection; nor were known vancomycin-resistance genes identified. The episodes could have been much worse. Science Watch has been talking to Dr. James Burnie from Manchester, U.K. He and colleagues have studied MRSA causing cases of septicemia in the 1990s (Clin. Infect. Dis., 31:87-9, 2000). As it happens, the isolates from patients in the Manchester region were not vancomycin resistant, but the bacteria became so when exposed to the antibiotic in the laboratory. Burnie notes that this resistance is not picked up on routine testing; special techniques are needed. It has probably been with us, he observes, "for quite some time prior to the original observation by the Japanese." Is this intermediate pattern of resistance, he asks, the prelude to full-blooded resistance in the future? This would be the "Apocalypse Now" scenario that article #11 hints at. Hospital cleanliness—or, rather, lack of it—is a hot topic in the U.K. these days. Perhaps greater attention to cleanliness is just as important as introducing restrictions on antibiotic prescribing both in hospitals and in the community. But that is prevention. What do we do with MRSA when it happens, now that vancomycin alone may not be enough? Combination therapy, perhaps? However, as Burnie notes there are problems with the drugs with which vancomycin might be combined—e.g., toxicity or, with ciprofloxacin, resistance (see #8). A new drug, linezolid, is being talked about as possible monotherapy. Given the proven ingenuity of S. aureus, that approach seems unwise, and Burnie agrees !Mr. David W. Sharp, M.A. (Cambridge), is deputy editor of The Lancet, London, U.K. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Science
Watch®, March/April 2001, Vol. 12, No. 2 Citing URL: http://www.sciencewatch.com/march-april2001/sw_march-april2001_page7.htm |
Search | March/April 2001 Index | Archives | Contact | Home
|
|
|
|
|
Science
Watch® is an editorial component of Essential
Science Indicators |
|
|
|
(c) 2008 The
Thomson Corporation. |