Evidence Hub

In vitro exposure to non-antipseudomonal antibiotics (NAPA) induces Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistance to antipseudomonal antibiotics (APA)

Lasry D, Harrison LB, Bamba R, Corsini R, Yansouni CP, Cheng MP, Lee TC, Lawandi A

bioRxiv, 2026

Abstract

Background: Pseudomonas aeruginosa readily evolves antimicrobial resistance through regulatory plasticity and stress-adaptive pathways. Clinically, antibiotics lacking intrinsic antipseudomonal activity are often favored with the assumption that they avoid selective pressure on P. aeruginosa . Whether subinhibitory exposure to such “non-antipseudomonal antibiotics” (NAPA) can nevertheless select for canonical resistance pathways remains incompletely defined.

Methods:: Three P. aeruginosa strains (ATCC 27853 and two bloodstream isolates) were serially passaged over 14 days in the presence of ertapenem, ceftriaxone, or moxifloxacin at one-third the baseline minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). MICs for antipseudomonal antibiotics (meropenem, ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin) were measured at serial time points and after a 3-day antibiotic-free recovery (day 14). Whole-genome sequencing was performed longitudinally to identify mutations.

Results: NAPA exposure led to reproducible elevations in antipseudomonal MICs: ertapenem triggered up to a 29-fold increase in meropenem MIC, ceftriaxone up to a 31-fold rise in ceftazidime MIC, and moxifloxacin up to a 12-fold increase in ciprofloxacin MIC. Elevated MICs persisted on day 14 despite absence of further antibiotic pressure. Genomic analysis revealed convergent evolution of mutations in efflux regulator genes ( nfxB, nalC, nalD, amrR ) and the β-lactamase–regulating gene dacB , emerging during periods of MIC escalation and mapping to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a preprint, done in cell cultures (in vitro), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free