Current issue
Staying a step ahead of staph
Antibiotic resistance is catching up with even the most powerful drugs. How Rockefeller scientists are fighting back.
BY JOSEPH BONNER
It started with a 40-year-old Michigan man with
diabetes, heart disease and kidney failure.
He’d had a bad year. Because of vascular
disease, he had sores on his feet that wouldn’t heal, and two months
earlier gangrene had developed on a toe, requiring amputation. He’d
been on a cocktail of antibiotics including one called
methicillin, a relative of penicillin, and vancomycin, which for 40 years
has been the drug of last resort for fighting stubborn bacterial
infections that resist other antibiotics.
In June of 2002, the Michigan man developed an
infection at the exit site of the catheter used for his kidney dialysis
treatments. Cultures taken from the site showed that the responsible
microbe was Staphylococcus aureus, the bacterium underlying as many as 2 million infections
and 80,000 deaths each year in the U.S. — and that it was resistant
to both methicillin and vancomycin.
It was the first time in medical history that staph
had successfully fought off the antibiotics of last resort.
Less than four months later, bacteriologists’
worst fears were confirmed: a culture from a separate patient in
Pennsylvania also tested positive for vancomycin resistant S. aureus. In both the
Michigan and Pennsylvania patients, the infections are believed to have
been caused by staph bacteria that had acquired a gene complex called vanA
from vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus
faecalis bacteria that were also present
at the sites of the infections.
Now, in Alexander Tomasz’ Rockefeller University lab, scientists are beginning
to piece together the molecular picture of how this strain of staph
bacteria resists both drugs.
Both methicillin and vancomycin work by destroying the
bacterium’s cell wall, but they do so in different ways. In the case
of methicillin, the drug inactivates four different proteins — called
penicillin-binding proteins — that the bacterium needs to construct
its cell wall; to survive methicillin, staph acquired a gene called mecA,
which produces a new penicillin-binding protein that takes over cell wall
construction when the bacterium’s apparatus becomes paralyzed.
Vancomycin, on the other hand, physically traps the molecular building
blocks that penicillin-binding proteins use to assemble the cell wall; to
survive vancomycin, staph acquired a gene called vanA, which produces an
abnormal cell wall precursor that the drug doesn’t recognize.
“Both resistance mechanisms are targeted on the
bacterial cell wall and each seems to be custom designed to match precisely
the mode of action of the antibiotics,” says Tomasz.
To search for new weaknesses, Tomasz and Anatoly
Severin, senior research associate, working with colleagues at the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, examined a strain of S. aureus with
resistance levels to vancomycin close to 1000 times higher than normal.
They made two encouraging discoveries.
First, they noticed that using the two drugs in
combination was extremely effective, even at relatively low doses. The new
penicillin-binding protein produced by staph resistant to methicillin, it
turns out, is unable to utilize the abnormal cell wall precursor produced
by staph resistant to vancomycin.
“The mechanism is antagonistic,” says
Tomasz, head of the Laboratory of Microbiology. “If you challenge
this bacterium with either vancomycin or methicillin, it is very resistant.
However, if you combine the two antibiotics, this resistance
collapses.” That finding — that both drugs together are still
effective — is encouraging news for doctors who soon may find
themselves without a single drug capable of killing staph infections.
Secondly, the Rockefeller scientists showed that the
structure of the cell wall produced from the abnormal cell wall precursor
has several abnormalities itself — abnormalities that may make the
resistant bacteria less likely to spread, at least in patients with healthy
immune systems.
“What we hope is that, at least for the time
being, the vancomycin resistant S. aureus has a price to pay for its victory against vancomycin
by surrendering some of the skills that make it such a dangerous
pathogen,” Tomasz says.
February 27, 2004
|
|
Archive Search
|
|
Editor
Zach Veilleux
Science Writers
Lauren Gravitz
Kristine Kelly
Assistant Editor
Talley Henning Brown
Art Direction
Bolle Design, NYC
Copyright © 2006
The Rockefeller University
|