Immune cells are activated during cellular responses to antigen by two described mechanisms: (i) direct uptake of antigen and (ii) extraction and internalization of membrane components from antigen-presenting cells. Although endocytosis of microbial antigens by pattern recognition molecules (PRM) also activates innate immunity, it is not known whether this involves extraction and internalization of microbial surface components. Epithelial cells on mucosal surfaces use a variety of receptors that are distinct from the classical endocytic PRM to bind and internalize intact microorganisms. Nonclassical receptor molecules theoretically could act as a type of endocytic PRM if these molecules could recognize, bind, extract, and internalize a pathogen-associated molecule and initiate cell signaling. We report here that the interaction between the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) and the outer core oligosaccharide of the lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in the outer membrane of Pseudomonas aeruginosa satisfies all of these conditions. P. aeruginosa LPS was specifically recognized and bound by CFTR, extracted from the organism's surface, and endocytosed by epithelial cells, leading to a rapid (5-to 15-min) and dynamic translocation of nuclear transcription factor NF-B. Inhibition of epithelial cell internalization of P. aeruginosa LPS prevented NF-B activation. Cellular activation depended on expression of wild-type CFTR, because both cultured ⌬F508 CFTR human airway epithelial cells and lung epithelial cells of transgenic-CF mice failed to endocytose LPS and translocate NF-B. CFTR serves as a critical endocytic PRM in the lung epithelium, coordinating the effective innate immune response to P. aeruginosa infection.
Background: We investigated the in vitro activities of nisin alone or in combination with vancomycin and ciprofloxacin against methicillin-resistant (MRSA) and -susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) strains. Methods: The minimum inhibitory concentrations were determined by microbroth dilution technique. Antibiotic combinations were assessed using the checkerboard technique. The time-kill curve method was used for determining the bactericidal activity of nisin alone and in combination. Results: For both MSSA and MRSA strains, the minimum inhibitory concentrations of nisin ranged between 4 and 16 mg/l. With a fractional inhibitory concentration of ≧0.5 as borderline, synergistic interactions were seen in three of five isolates with nisin-ciprofloxacin compared to two of five isolates with nisin-vancomycin combinations against both MSSA and MRSA. No antagonism was observed. The results of time-kill curve analysis demonstrated concentration-dependent rapid bactericidal activity of nisin and synergism almost in all strains when nisin was used in combination with ciprofloxacin, and early synergistic interactions in some of the strains when it was used in combination with vancomycin. Conclusion: Nisin seems to be a good candidate for further investigations in the treatment of Gram-positive bacteria, alone or in combination with antibiotics.
The In vitro activities of two antimicrobial cationic peptides, melittin and nisin alone and in combination with frequently used antibiotics (daptomycin, vancomycin, linezolid, ampicillin, and erythromycin), were assessed against clinical isolates of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-resistant S. aureus and Enterococcus faecalis. Using the broth microdilution method, minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ranges of melittin and nisin against all strains were 2-8 μg/ml and 2-32 μg/ml respectively. In combination studies performed with the microdilution checkerboard method using a fractional inhibitory concentration index of ≤ 0.5 as borderline, synergistic interactions occurred more frequently with nisin-ampicillin combination against MSSA and nisin-daptomycin combination against E. faecalis strains. The results of the time-killing curve analysis demonstrated that the concentration dependent rapid bactericidal activity of nisin, and that synergism or early synergism was detected in most strains when nisin or melittin was used in combination with antibiotics even at concentrations of 0.5 × MIC.
In vitro antibacterial and anti-biofilm activities of antimicrobial cationic peptides (AMPs) - melittin and colistin - both alone and in combination with antibiotics were evaluated against clinical isolates of Gram-negative bacteria. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and fractional inhibitory concentration (FIC) index were determined by the microbroth dilution and chequerboard techniques, respectively. The time-kill curve (TKC) method was used for determining the bactericidal activities of AMPs alone and in combination. Measurements of anti-biofilm activities were performed spectrophotometrically for both inhibition of attachment and 24-hour biofilm formation at MIC or subMIC. According to MIC90 values, the most active agents against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were colistin, imipenem and ciprofloxacin, respectively. In combination studies, synergistic effects were mostly seen with colistin-imipenem against E. coli and K. pneumoniae (50 and 54%, respectively), colistin-ciprofloxacin against P. aeruginosa (77%). In TKC studies, synergism was observed with almost all expected combinations, even more frequently than chequerboard method. All of the antimicrobial agents were able to inhibit attachment and 24-hour biofilm formation between 0-57% at 1/10 × MIC and 7-73% at 1 × or 1/10 × MIC, respectively. AMPs seem to be a good candidate for antimicrobial chemotherapy with their antibacterial and anti-biofilm activities as a single agent or in combination with antibiotics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.