Articles | Volume 7, issue 5
J. Bone Joint Infect., 7, 187–189, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-7-187-2022
J. Bone Joint Infect., 7, 187–189, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-7-187-2022
Editorial
06 Sep 2022
Editorial | 06 Sep 2022

Lysins – a new armamentarium for the treatment of bone and joint infections?

Lysins – a new armamentarium for the treatment of bone and joint infections?
Parham Sendi1, and Tristan Ferry2,3,4,5 Parham Sendi and Tristan Ferry
  • 1Institute for Infectious Diseases, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
  • 2Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69004 Lyon, France
  • 3Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, 69100 Villeurbanne, France
  • 4Centre de Références des IOA Complexes de Lyon, CRIOAc Lyon, 69004 Lyon, France
  • 5StaPath Team, Centre International de Recherche en Infectiologie, CIRI, Inserm U1111, CNRS UMR5308, ENS de Lyon, UCBL1, 69008 Lyon, France
  • JBJI Editor-in-chief

Correspondence: Parham Sendi (parham.sendi@unibe.ch)

The treatment of bone and joint infections (BJIs) is complex. It requires a well-functioning and frequently interacting multi-disciplinary team with expertise in orthopedic and trauma surgery, infectious diseases and clinical microbiology, musculoskeletal radiology, and plastic surgery, among others (Vasoo et al., 2019). Moreover, understanding of the biofilm pathogenesis must be incorporated into the treatment concepts (Tande and Patel, 2014). Considering the worrisome increasing trend of BJIs caused by multi-drug-resistant bacteria (Papadopoulos et al., 2019), additional challenges have entered the field, both from a treatment and infection control perspective.

While traditional antibiotics are losing their edge, new compounds, small molecules, and biological and chemical structures are potentially new weapons. Phage therapy is one of them. Phages can be injected intravenously or locally. Frankly, phage therapy is not a new concept. Fortunately, eastern European countries (e.g., Georgia) have kept phage therapy alive since 1923 (Dublanchet and Bourne, 2007). Ironically, one could say that, as we are facing the postantibiotic era, we are looking for recipes from the preantibiotic era. The usefulness of these compounds must be carefully reviewed, considering the most up-to-date principles of research.

Meanwhile, numerous publications have reported their success in using phage therapy for BJIs and implant-associated infections caused by multi-drug-resistant bacteria (Cano et al., 2021; Clarke et al., 2020; Ferry et al., 2020, 2021; Schoeffel et al., 2022). Of note, only experiences with positive outcomes have been published. There are no randomized clinical trials in the field of BJIs that have been completed.

As with every treatment, there are also drawbacks with phage therapy. Considering their specificity for the infecting organism, phages are not an ideal candidate for mass production. Patenting phages is not beneficial for the same reason and in light of the magnitude of existing organisms on this planet. There are also hurdles when phages are administered locally. Due to the high specificity of phages, the organism causing the infection must be isolated prior to surgery. Then, it can be applied during surgery after selecting the matching phage cocktail. If phage therapy is considered after the surgery, local treatment with phages is not easily feasible, except in patients with periprosthetic joint infections. In these infections, phages can be injected directly into the joint, but the implant–bone interface cannot be reached. Taken together, local phage therapy is complex and highly specific. It is an unsuitable method for preventing infection.

Lysins, which are biologic enzymes, are a promising alternative to phage therapy. While phages replicate within the targeted bacteria, they must also find their way out of their host bacteria (to infect new targeted bacteria). Phages do this by producing lysins, small molecules that destroy the bacterial cell wall from inside, and thus facilitate the expulsion of hundreds of new virions. Basic science research demonstrated that purified lysins destroy bacterial cell walls, also when added extracellularly (Fischetti, 2008; Fischetti et al., 2006). Hitherto, there have been no reports of bacterial resistance to the lysins, whereas acquisition of phage resistance has been described (Oechslin, 2018). Thus, purified lysins revealed their potential as a direct agent against bacterial infections.

Exebacase (previously named CF-301) and CF-296 are recombinant lysins derived from a Streptococcus suis phage. Interestingly, the spectrum of action of these lysins is broader in comparison with a specific S. aureus phage. They are also active against coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS). The activity against CoNS aligns with the following advantages. (i) CoNS are most frequently involved in implant-associated BJIs. (ii) There are currently 47 species recognized in the genus Staphylococcus (Becker et al., 2014). (iii) There are no available phages targeting these bacteria. In the phase-2 trial, exebacase has been used in patients with S. aureus bloodstream infections and endocarditis (Fowler et al., 2020) and is currently being investigated in the phase-3 trial for safety and efficacy (NCT04160468).

In the field of BJIs, exebacase has been investigated in vitro for its activity against S. aureus and CoNS biofilm (Schuch et al., 2017) and against methicillin-resistant S. aureus osteomyelitis in animals (Karau et al., 2019). CF-296 has been investigated for its activity against methicillin-resistant S. aureus osteomyelitis in animals (Karau et al., 2021). Currently, the clinical experience of exebacase is limited to a few patients with relapsing S. epidermidis periprosthetic joint infections (Karau et al., 2019). Further research is necessary to elucidate both the techniques of administration and local drug delivery of lysins in BJIs. Moreover, their relevance as an adjunctive therapy to antibiotics needs to be explored.

In this issue of Journal of Bone and Joint Infection, Karau et al. (2022) investigate the antibacterial activity of locally delivered exebacase or CF-296 in combination with intravenous daptomycin or saline against methicillin-resistant S. aureus in an experimental animal model of implant-associated osteomyelitis. The authors differentiated the efficacy results in implant and bone cultures. In implant cultures, exebacase alone or with daptomycin as well as CF-296 with daptomycin were more active than daptomycin alone or CF-296 alone. In bone cultures, CF-296 with daptomycin was more active than either CF-296 alone or daptomycin alone. There was no difference between the two lysins' activity when delivered locally in conjunction with systemic daptomycin, whether based on bone or implant cultures. The results of this study are important to note for the following reasons. First, no emergence of resistance was found to either lysin. Second, the activity of lysins may be different against bone and implant biofilms when administered alone. Third, the combination of systemically administered antibiotics and locally delivered lysins needs to be further explored. Indeed, it would be required to identify the potential best match of a specific antimicrobial agent with a specific lysin to target the causative microorganism in BJIs.

In line with the en vogue term “precision medicine”, lysins are promising options with considerable potential as add-on agents in the treatment armamentarium against bacterial infections, including BJIs. They may turn out to be key local or systemic anti-biofilm agents in the future and could compensate for the current challenges with antibiotic treatment against staphylococcal BJIs, including those related to rifampin. Of note, there are also BJI treatment challenges with fluoroquinolones, including the increasing resistance in Gram-negative bacteria. Lysins against Gram-negative lysins are in the pipeline.

Data availability

No data sets were used in this article.

Author contributions

PS and TF wrote the first draft and reviewed the final version

Ethical statement

Not applicable.

Disclaimer

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

Becker, K., Heilmann, C., and Peters, G.: Coagulase-negative staphylococci, Clin. Microbiol. Rev., 27, 870–926, https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.00109-13, 2014. 

Cano, E. J., Caflisch, K. M., Bollyky, P. L., Van Belleghem, J. D., Patel, R., Fackler, J., Brownstein, M. J., Horne, B., Biswas, B., Henry, M., Malagon, F., Lewallen, D. G., and Suh, G. A.: Phage Therapy for Limb-threatening Prosthetic Knee Klebsiella pneumoniae Infection: Case Report and In Vitro Characterization of Anti-biofilm Activity, Clin. Infect. Dis., 73, e144–e151, https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa705, 2021. 

Clarke, A. L., De Soir, S., and Jones, J. D.: The Safety and Efficacy of Phage Therapy for Bone and Joint Infections: A Systematic Review, Antibiotics (Basel), 9, 795, https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9110795, 2020. 

Dublanchet, A. and Bourne, S.: The epic of phage therapy, Can. J. Infect. Dis. Med. Microbiol., 18, 15–18, https://doi.org/10.1155/2007/365761, 2007. 

Ferry, T., Kolenda, C., Batailler, C., Gustave, C. A., Lustig, S., Malatray, M., Fevre, C., Josse, J., Petitjean, C., Chidiac, C., Leboucher, G., and Laurent, F.: Phage Therapy as Adjuvant to Conservative Surgery and Antibiotics to Salvage Patients With Relapsing S. aureus Prosthetic Knee Infection, Front Med (Lausanne), 7, 570572, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2020.570572, 2020. 

Ferry, T., Kolenda, C., Batailler, C., Gaillard, R., Gustave, C. A., Lustig, S., Fevre, C., Petitjean, C., Leboucher, G., and Laurent, F.: Case Report: Arthroscopic “Debridement Antibiotics and Implant Retention” With Local Injection of Personalized Phage Therapy to Salvage a Relapsing Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Prosthetic Knee Infection, Front Med (Lausanne), 8, 569159, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.569159, 2021. 

Fischetti, V. A.: Bacteriophage lysins as effective antibacterials, Curr. Opin. Microbiol., 11, 393–400, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mib.2008.09.012, 2008. 

Fischetti, V. A., Nelson, D., and Schuch, R.: Reinventing phage therapy: are the parts greater than the sum?, Nat. Biotechnol., 24, 1508–1511, https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1206-1508, 2006. 

Fowler Jr., V. G., Das, A. F., Lipka-Diamond, J., Schuch, R., Pomerantz, R., Jáuregui-Peredo, L., Bressler, A., Evans, D., Moran, G. J., Rupp, M. E., Wise, R., Corey, G. R., Zervos, M., Douglas, P. S., and Cassino, C.: Exebacase for patients with Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection and endocarditis, J. Clin. Invest., 130, 3750–3760, https://doi.org/10.1172/jci136577, 2020. 

Karau, M., Schmidt-Malan, S., Mandrekar, J., Lehoux, D., Schuch, R., Cassino, C., and Patel, R.: Locally delivered antistaphylococcal lysin exebacase or CF-296 is active in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus implant-associated osteomyelitis, J. Bone Joint Infect., 7, 169–175, https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-7-169-2022, 2022. 

Karau, M. J., Schmidt-Malan, S. M., Yan, Q., Greenwood-Quaintance, K. E., Mandrekar, J., Lehoux, D., Schuch, R., Cassino, C., and Patel, R.: Exebacase in Addition to Daptomycin Is More Active than Daptomycin or Exebacase Alone in Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Osteomyelitis in Rats, Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., 63, e01235-19, https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.01235-19, 2019. 

Karau, M. J., Schmidt-Malan, S. M., Mandrekar, J., Lehoux, D., Schuch, R., Cassino, C., and Patel, R.: Activity of Lysin CF-296 Alone and in Addition to Daptomycin in a Rat Model of Experimental Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Osteomyelitis, Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., 65, 00117-21, https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.00117-21, 2021.  

Oechslin, F.: Resistance Development to Bacteriophages Occurring during Bacteriophage Therapy, Viruses, 10, 351, https://doi.org/10.3390/v10070351, 2018. 

Papadopoulos, A., Ribera, A., Mavrogenis, A. F., Rodriguez-Pardo, D., Bonnet, E., Salles, M. J., Dolores Del Toro, M., Nguyen, S., Blanco-García, A., Skaliczki, G., Soriano, A., Benito, N., Petersdorf, S., Pasticci, M. B., Tattevin, P., Tufan, Z. K., Chan, M., O'Connell, N., Pantazis, N., Kyprianou, A., Pigrau, C., Megaloikonomos, P. D., Senneville, E., Ariza, J., Papagelopoulos, P. J., and Giannitsioti, E.: Multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant Gram-negative prosthetic joint infections: Role of surgery and impact of colistin administration, Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents, 53, 294–301, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2018.10.018, 2019. 

Schoeffel, J., Wang, E. W., Gill, D., Frackler, J., Horne, B., Manson, T., and Doub, J. B.: Successful Use of Salvage Bacteriophage Therapy for a Recalcitrant MRSA Knee and Hip Prosthetic Joint Infection, Pharmaceuticals (Basel), 15, 177, https://doi.org/10.3390/ph15020177, 2022. 

Schuch, R., Khan, B. K., Raz, A., Rotolo, J. A., and Wittekind, M.: Bacteriophage Lysin CF-301, a Potent Antistaphylococcal Biofilm Agent, Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., 61, 001117-21, https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.02666-16, 2017. 

Tande, A. J. and Patel, R.: Prosthetic joint infection, Clin. Microbiol. Rev., 27, 302–345, https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.00111-13, 2014. 

Vasoo, S., Chan, M., Sendi, P., and Berbari, E.: The Value of Ortho-ID Teams in Treating Bone and Joint Infections, J. Bone Joint Infect., 4, 295–299, https://doi.org/10.7150/jbji.41663, 2019.