Development of low cost, robust and reproducible biofilm static and pharmacodynamic assays

Abstract

SynopsisO_ST_ABSBackgroundC_ST_ABSThe complexity of diagnosing and treating biofilm-associated infections necessitates a comprehensive strategy to mitigate the rising rates of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Microtiter plate methods are used globally for determination of biofilm eradication concentrations (MBEC) but few have been adapted to observe pharmacodynamic observations. Here, we describe a method which allows for both static and pharmacodynamic assays of biofilm evaluation. MethodsA total of 150 clinical isolates from Southmead Hospital were assessed, representing five bacterial species (N=30 per bacterial species): Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella pneumoniae. MBECs were determined using a developed method using 96 well plates and glass beads. MBECs of seven different antibiotics were compared to those determined using the established Calgary biofilm device (CBD). Dynamic pharmacodynamic evaluations to produce Biofilm Time Kill curve (BTKC) based on published planktonic time kill curve (TKC) data and ISO recommendations were carried out using the glass bead model for K. pneumoniae and ciprofloxacin, S. aureus and levofloxacin and S. pneumoniae and vancomycin. Quantification of biofilm biomass was assessed at 0, 2, 4, 8 and 24 hours and compared to planktonic culture survival under comparable challenge conditions. ResultsComparing MBEC results for all bacterial strains and antibiotic challenges showed no statistical difference between the glass bead and CBD methods (P <0.05). Biofilm BTKC AUBKC were inferior to planktonic equivalents but demonstrated specific pharmacodynamic patterns of biofilm reduction efficacy. MBEC correlated with biofilm BTKC penetration in line with clinical observations for S. aureus vs vancomycin and S. pneumoniae vs levofloxacin. ConclusionsThe glass bead biofilm models provide robust, reproducible alternatives to the traditional methods of determining MBEC and bridge the gap with biofilm pharmacodynamic evaluations. These methods also provide a low-cost option to current methods as only standard laboratory equipment is required, allowing for the generation of comprehensive data sets. This ensures greater translatability to complex in vitro models and clinical scenarios.