BACTERIAL INTERFERENCE BETWEEN STRAINS OF <i>S. aureus</i>

Shinefield, Henry R.; Ribble, John C.; Boris, Marvin; Eichenwald, Heinz F.; Aly, Raza; Maibach, Howard I.

doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1974.tb41509.x

Cited by 35 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies in the 1960's have shown that a less pathogenic S. aureus strain could be used to successfully outcompete the epidemic S. aureus strain [4]. Yet, the inherent danger associated with the application of a pathogen to displace another pathogen makes that an impractical approach [5], and led to the abandonment of that strategy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An approach that showed promise in the 1960's was a strategy called bacterial interference [4], in which a less virulent S. aureus strain was used to block colonization by pathogenic S. aureus strains. Application of this strategy in the setting of S. aureus outbreaks proved to be effective, as patients treated with the “nonpathogenic“ 502A S. aureus strain showed a significant decrease in infection rate in multiple trials [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Application of this strategy in the setting of S. aureus outbreaks proved to be effective, as patients treated with the “nonpathogenic“ 502A S. aureus strain showed a significant decrease in infection rate in multiple trials [4]. Unfortunately 502A was eventually linked to cases of S. aureus infections, and therefore enthusiasm for this strategy was dampened [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Intranasal Application of S. epidermidis Prevents Colonization by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Mice

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methicillin-resistant S. aureus emerged in recent decades to become a leading cause of infection worldwide. Colonization with MRSA predisposes to infection and facilitates transmission of the pathogen; however, available regimens are ineffective at preventing MRSA colonization. Studies of human nasal flora suggest that resident bacteria play a critical role in limiting S. aureus growth, and prompted us to query whether application of commensal resident bacteria could prevent nasal colonization with MRSA. We established a murine model system to study this question, and showed that mice nasally pre-colonized with S. epidermidis became more resistant to colonization with MRSA. Our study suggests that application of commensal bacteria with antibiotics could represent a more effective strategy to prevent MRSA colonization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intranasal Application of S. epidermidis Prevents Colonization by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Mice

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the 1960s, when a number of serious S. aureus epidemics occurred in hospital nurseries, it was noted that pre-existing colonization of the nasal mucosa or umbilical stump of infants prevented subsequent colonization by the epidemic strain. This observation led to the deliberate inoculation of neonates with a “low-virulence” S. aureus 502A strain that obviated colonization with the emerging penicillin-resistant strains and resulted in significant decreases in invasive S. aureus disease (117). …”

Section: Expanding the “Host” Concept – Impact Of The Microbiota On Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

Staphylococcus aureus Colonization: Modulation of Host Immune Response and Impact on Human Vaccine Design

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

† Aisling F. Brown and John M. Leech have contributed equally to this work.In apparent contrast to its invasive potential Staphylococcus aureus colonizes the anterior nares of 20-80% of the human population. The relationship between host and microbe appears particularly individualized and colonization status seems somehow predetermined. After decolonization, persistent carriers often become re-colonized with their prior S. aureus strain, whereas non-carriers resist experimental colonization. Efforts to identify factors facilitating colonization have thus far largely focused on the microorganism rather than on the human host. The host responds to S. aureus nasal colonization via local expression of anti-microbial peptides, lipids, and cytokines. Interplay with the co-existing microbiota also influences colonization and immune regulation. Transient or persistent S. aureus colonization induces specific systemic immune responses. Humoral responses are the most studied of these and little is known of cellular responses induced by colonization. Intriguingly, colonized patients who develop bacteremia may have a lower S. aureus-attributable mortality than their non-colonized counterparts. This could imply a staphylococcal-specific immune "priming" or immunomodulation occurring as a consequence of colonization and impacting on the outcome of infection. This has yet to be fully explored. An effective vaccine remains elusive. Anti-S. aureus vaccine strategies may need to drive both humoral and cellular immune responses to confer efficient protection. Understanding the influence of colonization on adaptive response is essential to intelligent vaccine design, and may determine the efficacy of vaccine-mediated immunity. Clinical trials should consider colonization status and the resulting impact of this on individual patient responses. We urgently need an increased appreciation of colonization and its modulation of host immunity.

show abstract

“…These data suggest that most noncarriers are inherently resistant to colonization, but when S. aureus carriage is imposed, minor skin lesions can develop. Bacterial interference may be an explanation of the noncarrier state: when an ecological niche is already occupied by other bacteria, S. aureus does not seem to have the means to establish a local population (18). Recent data indicate that when the noncarriers were treated with mupirocin prior to inoculation, elimination was as efficient: only 1 out of 16 volunteers was found to be still colonized after 16 weeks (data not shown).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Human Factor inStaphylococcus aureusNasal Carriage

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Persistent nasal carriers and noncarriers of Staphylococcus aureus were inoculated with a mixture of different S. aureus strains. The majority of noncarriers and nearly all persistent carriers returned to their original carrier state after artificial inoculation. Furthermore, the majority of persistent carriers tested positive again for their original resident strain. Using a human nasal inoculation model, we here demonstrate that the human factor is an important determinant of S. aureus nasal carriage.

show abstract

BACTERIAL INTERFERENCE BETWEEN STRAINS OF S. aureus

Cited by 35 publications

References 0 publications

Intranasal Application of S. epidermidis Prevents Colonization by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Mice

Intranasal Application of S. epidermidis Prevents Colonization by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Mice

Staphylococcus aureus Colonization: Modulation of Host Immune Response and Impact on Human Vaccine Design

Human Factor inStaphylococcus aureusNasal Carriage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About