Mycobacterium abscessus is a highly drug-resistant nontuberculous mycobacterium (NTM). Efforts to discover new treatments for M. abscessus infections are accelerating, with a focus on cell wall synthesis proteins (M. abscessus l,d-transpeptidases 1 to 5 [LdtMab1 to LdtMab5] and d,d-carboxypeptidase) that are targeted by β-lactam antibiotics. A challenge to this approach is the presence of chromosomally encoded β-lactamase (BlaMab). Using a mechanism-based approach, we found that a novel ceftaroline-imipenem combination effectively lowered the MICs of M. abscessus isolates (MIC50 ≤ 0.25 μg/ml; MIC90 ≤ 0.5 μg/ml). Combining ceftaroline and imipenem with a β-lactamase inhibitor, i.e., relebactam or avibactam, demonstrated only a modest effect on susceptibility compared to each of the β-lactams alone. In steady-state kinetic assays, BlaMab exhibited a lower Ki app (0.30 ± 0.03 μM for avibactam and 136 ± 14 μM for relebactam) and a higher acylation rate for avibactam (k2/K = 3.4 × 105 ± 0.4 × 105 M−1 s−1 for avibactam and 6 × 102 ± 0.6 × 102 M−1 s−1 for relebactam). The kcat/Km was nearly 10-fold lower for ceftaroline fosamil (0.007 ± 0.001 μM−1 s−1) than for imipenem (0.056 ± 0.006 μM−1 s−1). Timed mass spectrometry captured complexes of avibactam and BlaMab, LdtMab1, LdtMab2, LdtMab4, and d,d-carboxypeptidase, whereas relebactam bound only BlaMab, LdtMab1, and LdtMab2. Interestingly, LdtMab1, LdtMab2, LdtMab4, LdtMab5, and d,d-carboxypeptidase bound only to imipenem when incubated with imipenem and ceftaroline fosamil. We next determined the binding constants of imipenem and ceftaroline fosamil for LdtMab1, LdtMab2, LdtMab4, and LdtMab5 and showed that imipenem bound >100-fold more avidly than ceftaroline fosamil to LdtMab1 and LdtMab2 (e.g., Ki app or Km of LdtMab1 = 0.01 ± 0.01 μM for imipenem versus 0.73 ± 0.08 μM for ceftaroline fosamil). Molecular modeling indicates that LdtMab2 readily accommodates imipenem, but the active site must widen to ≥8 Å for ceftaroline to enter. Our analysis demonstrates that ceftaroline and imipenem binding to multiple targets (l,d-transpeptidases and d,d-carboxypeptidase) and provides a mechanistic rationale for the effectiveness of this dual β-lactam combination in M. abscessus infections.

Durlobactam (DUR) is a potent inhibitor of Bla Mab and provides protection of amoxicillin and imipenem against hydrolysis. DUR has intrinsic activity and forms stable acyl-enzyme complexes with Ldt Mab2 and Ldt Mab4 . The ability of DUR to protect amoxicillin and imipenem against Bla Mab and its intrinsic activity along with the dual β-lactam target redundancy can explain the rationale behind the potent activity of this combination.

Background: Recent studies revealed a high prevalence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, especially in those who are critically ill. Available studies report varying prevalence rates. Hence, the exact prevalence remains uncertain. Moreover, there is an ongoing debate regarding the appropriate dosage of thromboprophylaxis.Methods: We performed a systematic review and proportion meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed and EMBASE for studies exploring the prevalence of VTE in critically ill COVID-19 patients till 25/07/2020. We pooled the proportion of VTE. Additionally, in a subgroup analysis, we pooled VTE events detected by systematic screening. Finally, in an exploratory analysis, we compared the odds of VTE in patients on prophylactic compared with therapeutic anticoagulation.Results: The review comprised 24 studies and over 2,500 patients. The pooled proportion of VTE prevalence was 0.31 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24, 0.39; I2 94%], of VTE utilizing systematic screening was 0.48 (95% CI 0.33, 0.63; I2 91%), of deep venous thrombosis was 0.23 (95% CI 0.14, 0.32; I2 96%), and of pulmonary embolism was 0.14 (95% CI 0.09, 0.20; I2 90%). Exploratory analysis of few studies, utilizing systematic screening, VTE risk increased significantly with prophylactic, compared with therapeutic anticoagulation [odds ratio (OR) 5.45; 95% CI 1.90, 15.57; I2 0%].Discussion: Our review revealed a high prevalence of VTE in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Almost 50% of patients had VTE detected by systematic screening. Higher thromboprophylaxis dosages may reduce VTE burden in this patient's cohort compared with standard prophylactic anticoagulation; however, this is to be ascertained by ongoing randomized controlled trials.