Meeting the challenge of antibiotic resistance

Published 18 September 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a1438
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a1438

Analysis

Meeting the challenge of antibiotic resistance

Otto Cars, professor¹, Liselotte Diaz Högberg, researcher², Mary Murray, freelance consultant; member of the WHO expert panel on national drug policy; visiting research fellow and freelance consultant on rational use of medicines³, Olle Nordberg, former executive director⁴, Satya Sivaraman, journalist⁵, Cecilia Stålsby Lundborg, associate professor and professor^6,7, Anthony D So, director⁸, Göran Tomson, professor international health system research and director of doctoral programme^6,9

¹ Infectious Diseases, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, ² Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, ³ Wee Jasper, University of South Australia School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, Adelaide, Australia , ⁴ Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, Uppsala, ⁵ New Delhi, India, ⁶ Division of International Health (IHCAR), Department of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm , ⁷ Nordic School of Public Health, Göteborg, Sweden, ⁸ Program on Global Health and Technology Access, Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA, ⁹ Medical Management Centre (MMC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm

Correspondence to: O Cars otto.cars@medsci.uu.se

A concerted global response is needed to tackle rising rates of antibiotic resistance, say Otto Cars and colleagues

Antibiotics changed the world. Since their discovery almost eight decades ago, they have revolutionised the treatment of infections, transforming once deadly diseases into manageable health problems. The growing phenomenon of bacterial resistance, caused by the use and abuse of antibiotics and the simultaneous decline in research and development of new medicines, is now threatening to take us back to a pre-antibiotic era. Without effective treatment and prevention of bacterial infections, we also risk rolling back important achievements of modern medicine such as major surgery, organ transplantation, and cancer chemotherapy.

Data from low income and middle income countries indicate that, because of the development of resistance to first line antibiotics, 70% of hospital acquired neonatal infections could not be successfully treated by using WHO’s recommended regimen.¹ A recently published study of Tanzanian children confirmed that ineffective treatment of bloodstream infections due to antibiotic resistance predicts fatal outcome independently of underlying diseases.² In that hospital based study, mortality from bloodstream infections caused by Gram negative bacteria was more than double the mortality from malaria.

Antibiotic resistance is becoming important in high income countries. In England and Wales, for example, the number of registered deaths in which meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is mentioned increased from less than 50 in 1993 to more than 1600 in 2006. In 2007 there was a slight decrease.³ The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, in its first epidemiological report on communicable diseases in Europe, states that the most important disease threat in Europe is from micro-organisms that have become resistant to antibiotics.^{4 5}

The emergence of antibiotic resistance is further complicated by the fact that bacteria and their resistance genes are travelling faster and further.^{6 7} We are facing not only epidemics but pandemics of antibiotic resistance.⁸ Airlines now carry more than two billion passengers annually, vastly increasing the opportunities for rapid spread of infectious agents, including antibiotic resistant bacteria, internationally. ⁹ The spread of resistance is also facilitated by worldwide distribution of food.¹⁰ Another important factor is poor hygiene in hospitals as well as in the community, augmenting the rapid spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria in vulnerable populations.

Unblocking collective action

Although the essential components of control of antibiotic resistance have long been well known, success has been limited in changing policies and efficiently responding to the problem.^{11 12} The relative lack of data on the morbidity and mortality attributable to antibiotic resistance, including the economic impact on individuals as well as on health care and societies, may explain the weak reaction from politicians, public health workers, and consumers to this threat to public health.

Individual stakeholders might well recognise the problem, but because it is complex, antibiotic resistance often becomes no one’s responsibility, which blocks collective action. Action is urgently needed in three key areas: leadership on international and national levels, change in the behaviour of consumers and providers, and the development of antibacterial agents to match current public health needs.

International and national leadership
International organisations
In 1998, the World Health Assembly adopted a resolution urging member states to take action on the problem of antimicrobial resistance.¹³ In 2000, the World Health Organization requested a massive effort to prevent the "health care catastrophe of tomorrow,"⁷ and shortly thereafter presented a global strategy for the containment of antimicrobial resistance, calling for a multidisciplinary and coordinated approach.¹⁴ However, sufficient financial and human resources to implement the strategy were never provided. Member states recognised this lack of leadership and initiated a new resolution, adopted by the World Health Assembly in 2005, requesting the director general to strengthen WHO’s leadership role in containing antimicrobial resistance and to provide more technical support.¹⁵

Little has taken place to implement the resolution. The difficulties of enforcing these recommendations on a global level are evident, and the links between the well formulated strategies at the level of global society and the acceptance level by national policymakers are weak. WHO, international professional organisations, and other international stakeholders must provide coordination and resources for generating up to date information on the burden and the magnitude of antibiotic resistance at regional and subregional levels. Evidence is needed on effective interventions for prevention and control of antibiotic resistance at national and local levels, and more emphasis on prevention of infectious diseases is needed. Solving basic problems such as lack of safe drinking water, poor nutrition, and dysfunctional sanitation will go a long way toward curbing the needless use of antibiotics as quick-fix solutions to avoidable diseases.⁷

At national level
Strategies for containing antibiotic resistance in low income countries are still blocked by patients’ poverty and weak health systems,¹⁶ and many high income countries with well developed regulations and policies lack coordinated strategies against antibiotic resistance. Although the European Union has responded to the resistance problem, antibiotics are still sold over the counter without a prescription in some EU countries, violating existing laws and regulations, and in all countries self medication with leftover medicines occurs.¹⁷ The root causes of certain behaviours need to be tackled, and the ultimate responsibility for coordinating the work lies with the government.

National mandated multidisciplinary programmes can move from recommendations to implementation and audits.¹⁸ For example, in Sweden the government is funding Strama, a nationwide multidisciplinary and multifaceted action programme against antibiotic resistance. Antibiotic sales have been reduced without measurable negative consequences, and resistance remains low.¹⁹ In Chile, after a mass media campaign, regulatory measures were implemented to make antibiotics available by prescription only, resulting in an initial decrease of 35% in antibiotic sales.²⁰

Behavioural change
Social constraints and cultural views of infectious conditions influence the use of antibiotics.²¹ Although the public’s demand for antibiotics often is perceived as high even for conditions without a clinical indication for antibiotic treatment,^{22 23} studies have shown that this demand is overestimated by the prescriber,²⁴ and antibiotics could therefore successfully be replaced by better information and follow-up.

The role of the patients as consumers is growing stronger. They need access to information and knowledge to reduce their expectations of antibiotics in self limiting infections, and doctors need new tools to help them justify their treatment decisions.²⁵ It could be unrealistic to expect people to restrict their antibiotic use in favour of a common good to prevent resistance—but if the arguments for restricting the use of antibiotics can be made sufficiently convincing, reduced demand from the consumer may be the strongest force driving change. Studies increasingly emphasise the risk for the individual when taking an antibiotic, including the risks of becoming a long term carrier of antibiotic resistant bacteria,^{26 27} which might confer a greater risk in a subsequent severe infection. Reliable information on the adverse effects of antibiotics on the microbiological flora might provide a stronger incentive for not using antibiotics unnecessarily than would more general messages about risks for society through the development of resistance. For prescribers and other drug providers, multifaceted interventions including so called academic detailing are effective to increase adherence to recommendations in both high income settings and low income settings.^{28 29}

Developing new antibacterials
For many years, needs for antibacterial drugs were met by the pharmaceutical industry, and the apparent symbiosis between the interests of the community and those of the industry prevailed. Today we see a different scenario. Existing antibiotics are losing their effect at an alarming pace, but development of new antibiotics is declining. More than a dozen new classes of antibiotics were developed in the 1930s through the 1960s, but only two new classes have been developed since then.³⁰ Nor does the trend of declining innovation seem to be reversing. In a study of the top 15 pharmaceutical companies, only 1.6% of drugs in development were antibiotics, none of which were from novel classes and leaving need unmet for multiresistant Gram negative infections.³¹

With existing incentives, current levels of innovation are clearly inadequate.³² Proposals on how to break this trend have been put forward. Some have suggested arrangements that would increase the anticipated revenue by lengthening the period of patent protection or exclusivity over data submitted for drug registration. However, antibiotics already have small markets and emergence of resistance may further reduce the expected return of investment, so these incentives are likely to do little to stimulate greater innovation for antibacterials.³³ There are also scientific challenges for development of new antibiotics.³⁴

If today’s market cannot deliver what the public needs, we must envisage other approaches that better engage both public and private sector resources.³⁵ One model is product development partnerships (PDPs), arrangements between public organisations and private companies to develop drugs when markets otherwise fail to meet public health priorities. This approach is now used for some drug projects targeting other neglected infectious diseases, such as malaria and tuberculosis.³⁶ Mechanisms creating supplements or replacing revenues in small and resource poor markets are another approach. Advanced market commitments (AMCs) create a fund that guarantees a certain price for drugs that meet therapeutic targets where there is a demand for the drug. A recent example is the pneumococcal vaccine AMC.³⁷

A gap analysis of drugs currently under development in light of current resistance patterns and trends would give priority to the most urgently needed antibiotics and give incentives for developing antibacterials with new mechanisms of action. But no matter how innovation is accelerated, any public investment must be matched by public health accountability. The use of new antibiotics must be safeguarded by regulations and practices that ensure rational use, to avoid repeating the mistakes we have made by overusing the old ones.

Another lack is efficient and affordable diagnostics with high sensitivity and specificity to distinguish bacterial from viral diseases, and to identify resistance patterns in bacteria. Such diagnostics would reduce inappropriate use of antibiotics and minimise the delays of treatment, thereby saving lives.

Moving to concerted action

A fundamentally changed view of antibiotics is needed. They must be looked on as a common good, where individuals must be aware that their choice to use an antibiotic will affect the possibility of effectively treating bacterial infections in other people. All antibiotic use, appropriate or not, "uses up" some of the effectiveness of that antibiotic, diminishing our ability to use it in the future.³⁸ ReAct—Action on Antibiotic Resistance believes that for current and future generations to have access to effective prevention and treatment of bacterial infections as part of their right to health, all of us need to act now. The window of opportunity is rapidly closing.

Summary points Antibiotics are a prerequisite for many of the advanced technologies in today’s healthcare Although antibacterial resistance is growing, development of new antibiotics has declined A new paradigm in which antibiotics are considered as a non-renewable resource is needed The know-do gap in control of bacterial resistance to antibiotics must be tackled on international, national, and individual levels

Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a1438

---

Contributors and sources: OC, LDH, MM, SS, CSL, and ADS are members of the international secretariat and all authors are active members of ReAct – Action on Antibiotic Resistance (www.reactgroup.org), a growing global network of individuals and organisations working towards the mission that current and future generations should have access to antibiotic treatment as a part of their right to health. ReAct was initiated in 2004 by Strama, the Swedish strategic programme against antibiotic resistance (www.strama.se); the Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation (www.dhf.uu.se), and the Division of International Health (IHCAR) at Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Supported by the Swedish Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), ReAct is working towards five objectives: identify and facilitate removal of critical evidence gaps that block action to contain antibiotic resistance; develop strategic options to remove barriers to innovation of new antibiotics and diagnostics; advocate for better access to and use of effective and affordable antibiotics for those in need; promote global consensus for a new paradigm on the use of antibiotics; increase awareness of antibiotic resistance as a threat to global public health and engage key stake holders in action.

Competing interests: None declared.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

References

1. Zaidi AK, Huskins WC, Thaver D, Bhutta ZA, Abbas Z, Goldmann DA. Hospital-acquired neonatal infections in developing countries. Lancet 2005;365:1175-88.
2. Blomberg B, Manji KP, Urassa WK, Tamim BS, Mwakagile DS, Jureen R, et al. Antimicrobial resistance predicts death in Tanzanian children with bloodstream infections: a prospective cohort study. BMC Infect Dis 2007;7:43.
3. National Statistics. MRSA deaths decrease in 2007, www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1067
4. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Annual epidemiological report on communicable diseases in Europe. December 2007. http://ecdc.europa.eu/pdf/ECDC_epi_report_2007.pdf
5. ReAct—Action on Antibiotic Resistance. Burden of resistance to multi-resistant gram-negative bacilli (MRGN). 1 March 2007. http://soapimg.icecube.snowfall.se/stopresistance/ReAct_Burden%20of%20resistance%20to%20Multi%20resist%20and%20Gram%20negative%20Bacilli%20MRGN.pdf
6. Grundmann H, Aires-de-Sousa M, Boyce J, Tiemersma E. Emergence and resurgence of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus as a public-health threat. Lancet 2006;368:874-85.
7. World Health Organization. Report on infectious diseases 2000: overcoming antimicrobial resistance. 2000. www.who.int/infectious-disease-report/2000/index.html
8. Cantón R, Coque TM. The CTX-M β-lactamase pandemic. Current Opinion in Microbiology 2006;9:466-75.
9. World Health Organization. World health report 2007: a safer future: global public health security in the 21st century. 2007. www.who.int/whr/2007/whr07_en.pdf
10. Butaye P, Michael G B, Schwarz S, Barrett TJ, Brisabois A, White DG. The clonal spread of multidrug-resistant non-typhi Salmonellaserotypes. Microb Infect 2006;8:1891-7.
11. Huovinen P, Cars O. Control of antimicrobial resistance: time for action. BMJ 1998;317:613-4.
12. Hawkey PM. Action against antibiotic resistance: no time to lose. Lancet 1998;351:1298-9.
13. World Health Assembly. Emerging and other communicable diseases: antimicrobial resistance. May 1998. http://mednet3.who.int/prioritymeds/report/append/microb_wha5117.pdf
14. World Health Organization. Global strategy for containment of antimicrobial resistance. 2001. www.who.int/drugresistance/WHO_Global_Strategy_English.pdf
15. World Health Assembly. Improving the containment of antimicrobial resistance. May 2005. www.tufts.edu/med/apua/Chapters/WHA58_27-en.pdf
16. Okeke IN, Aboderin OA, Byarugaba DK, Ojo KK, Opintan JA. Growing problem of multidrug-resistant enteric pathogens in Africa. Emerg Infect Dis 2007;13(11). www.cdc.gov/EID/content/13/11/1640.htm
17. Grigoryan L, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Johannes Burgerhof GM, Mechtler R, Deschepper R, Tambic-Andrasevic A, et al. Self-medication with antibiotics in the general population: a survey in nineteen European countries. Emerg Infect Dis 2006;12(3). www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no03/05-0992.htm
18. Carbon C, Cars O, Christiansen K. Moving from recommendation to implementation and audit: part 1. Current recommendations and programs: a critical commentary. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002;8(suppl 2):92-106.
19. Mölstad S, Erntell M, Hanberger H, Melander E, Norman C, Skoog G, et al. Sustained reduction of antibiotic use and low bacterial resistance: 10-year follow-up of the Swedish Strama programme. Lancet Infect Dis 2008;8:125-32.
20. Bavestrello FL, Cabello MA, Casanova Z, Dunny. Impact of regulatory measures on antibiotic sales in Chile. Rev Méd Chile 2002;130:1265-72.
21. Harbarth S, Samore MH. Antimicrobial resistance determinants and future control. Emerg Infect Dis 2005;11(6). www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol11no06/05-0167.htm
22. Chen C, Chen YM, Hwang KL, Lin SJ, Yang CC, Tsay RW, et al. Behavior, attitudes, and knowledge about antibiotic usage among residents of Changhua, Taiwan. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2005;38:53-9.
23. Trepka M, Belongia E, Chyou P-H, Davis J, Schwartz B. The effect of a community intervention trial on parental knowledge and awareness of antibiotic resistance and appropriate antibiotic use in children. Pediatrics 2001;107:6.
24. Macfarlane J, Holmes W, Macfarlane R, Britten N. Influence of patients’ expectations on antibiotic management of acute lower respiratory tract illness in general practice: questionnaire study. BMJ 1997;315:1211-4.
25. Del Mar C. Prescribing antibiotics in primary care. BMJ 2007;335:407-8.
26. Sjölund M, Wreiber K, Andersson DI, Blaser MJ, Engstrand L. Long-term persistence of resistant Enterococcus species after antibiotics to eradicate Helicobacter pylori. Ann Intern Med 2003 16;139:483-7.
27. Nasrin D, Collignon PJ, Roberts L, Wilson EJ, Pilotto LS, Douglas RM. Effect of beta lactam antibiotic use in children on pneumococcal resistance to penicillin: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2002;324:28-30.
28. Dollman WB, LeBlanc VT, Stevens L, O’Connor PJ, Turnidge JD. A community-based intervention to reduce antibiotic use for upper respiratory tract infections in regional South Australia. Med J Aust 2005;182:617-20.
29. Awad AI, Eltayeb IB, Baraka OZ. Changing antibiotics prescribing practices in health centers of Khartoum State, Sudan. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2006;62:135-42.
30. Infectious Diseases Society of America. Bad bugs, no drugs: as antibiotic discovery stagnate and a public health crisis brews. July 2004. www.idsociety.org/badbugsnodrugs.html
31. Spellberg B, Powers JH, Brass EP, Miller LG, Edwards JE Jr. Trends in antimicrobial drug development: implications for the future. Clin Infect Dis 2004;38:1279-86.
32. Projan SJ. Why is big pharma getting out of antibacterial drug discovery? Curr Opin Microbiol 2003;6:427-30.
33. Outterson K, Samora JB, Keller-Cuda K. Will longer antimicrobial patents improve global public health? Lancet Infect Dis 2007;7:559-66.
34. Payne D, Tomasz A. The challenge of antibiotic resistant bacterial pathogens: the medical need, the market, and prospects for new antimicrobial agents. Curr Opin Microbiol 2004;7:435-8.
35. Cars O, So A, Högberg L, Manz C. Innovating for bacterial resistance. ESCMID News 2007;2:22-4.
36. Moran M. A breakthrough in R&D for neglected diseases: new ways to get the drugs we need. PLoS Med 2005;2:e302.
37. Document prepared by the World Band and GAVI under the guidance of Governments of Italy, Canada, and the United Kingdom. AMC Pilot Proposal. 7 September 2006. www.vaccineamc.org/files/AMCPilotProposal.pdf
38. Laxminarayan R, Malani A, Howard D, Smith DL. Extending the cure: policy responses to the growing threat of antibiotic resistance. Alexandria: Resources for the Future, 2007. www.extendingthecure.org/research_and_downloads.html

(Accepted 15 May 2008)