Skip to content
antibacterial .ai

Resistance reference

Antibiotic resistance, mechanism by mechanism

Resistance is not one phenomenon. It is four or five distinct engineering problems, and a compound series usually dies to exactly one of them.

At a glance

Class 1
Enzymatic inactivation, for example beta-lactamases
Class 2
Target modification or protection
Class 3
Efflux, active removal of the compound
Class 4
Reduced permeability, porin loss

Antibiotic resistance is usually discussed as one phenomenon. For a discovery team it is more useful as four distinct engineering problems, because a compound series almost always dies to exactly one of them, and the fix is different in each case.

The four mechanism classes

1. Enzymatic inactivation

The organism makes an enzyme that chemically destroys or modifies the compound. The canonical example is the beta-lactamase family, which hydrolyses the beta-lactam ring. Thousands of variants exist, grouped into classes A, B, C and D, and they range from narrow spectrum penicillinases to the carbapenemases described on the carbapenem resistance page. Aminoglycoside modifying enzymes work the same way by acetylating, phosphorylating or adenylylating the drug.

What it means for a series: this is the mechanism most amenable to chemistry. Inhibitor combinations and ring modifications have repeatedly restored activity. It is a solvable problem with a known playbook.

2. Target modification or protection

The binding site changes so the compound no longer fits, or a protein shields it. Examples include gyrA and parC mutations against fluoroquinolones, the mecA gene giving S. aureus a low affinity penicillin binding protein (see MRSA), the vanA operon remodelling the peptidoglycan terminus away from D-Ala-D-Ala, ribosomal methylation against macrolides, and ribosomal protection proteins such as TetM.

What it means for a series: the hardest of the four. If the target has already moved in circulating isolates, medicinal chemistry on the same pharmacophore rarely recovers it. This is the mechanism that justifies killing a scaffold.

3. Efflux

Pumps export the compound before it accumulates. In Gram-negatives the RND family, spanning both membranes, does most of the work: AcrAB-TolC in E. coli, MexAB-OprM in P. aeruginosa, AdeABC in A. baumannii. Many pumps have broad substrate ranges, so one upregulation event raises MICs across several unrelated classes at once.

What it means for a series: often addressable by chemistry. Changes to charge, polarity and shape can reduce recognition by a pump. It is a transport problem, and the Gram-negative bacteria page covers the accumulation rules.

4. Reduced permeability

The compound cannot get in. Porin loss or porin mutation in K. pneumoniae (OmpK35 and OmpK36) is the usual route, frequently combined with a beta-lactamase so that whatever does enter is destroyed. Intrinsic low permeability, as in P. aeruginosa, is the same problem present from the start.

What it means for a series: similar to efflux. It is about the physicochemistry of the molecule rather than the pharmacophore, and it is why so many potent enzyme inhibitors are inactive on whole cells.

How resistance spreads

Two routes. Vertical, through chromosomal mutation under selection, which is slow and stays in the lineage. And horizontal, through plasmids, transposons and integrons, which moves whole cassettes of resistance genes between species and is why a mechanism that appears in one organism turns up shortly afterwards in another. Plasmid carried genes such as qnr, mcr and the carbapenemases are the ones that reshape a whole treatment landscape quickly.

Why a mechanism name changes a program decision

Mechanism namedLikely fixProgram implication
Beta-lactamaseInhibitor combination, ring modificationKeep the scaffold, add a partner
EffluxReduce pump recognition, change charge and shapeKeep the scaffold, work the periphery
Porin lossSmaller, more polar, self promoted uptakePhysicochemistry programme
Target mutationNew binding mode or new targetUsually a reason to stop

That is the practical value of a read-out that names the mechanism rather than just returning a number. A high MIC tells you the compound failed. The mechanism tells you whether failing was fixable.

The wider picture

Resistance surveillance, priority pathogen lists and the state of the pipeline are covered under antimicrobial resistance, and the organisms that attract the superbugs label are described there. Alternatives to small molecules, including phage therapy and antimicrobial peptides, each have their own resistance story.

Screen a compound below and read which of the four classes the model expects to take it out on each organism.

Run it

Screen a compound against resistant strains

The panel below is preselected for this page. Change the compound, run it, and read the matrix. Three screens per session, no account needed.

Run a screen

of 3 left

Strain panel

No account needed. 3 screens per session.

Sample output Ciprofloxacin Fluoroquinolone
Worked example, replaced when you run
Strain MIC (µg/mL) Call Resistance risk Conf.
S. aureus (MRSA) 0.5->32 R Resistant target mutation, grlA and gyrA Fluoroquinolone resistance is widespread in methicillin resistant lineages.
E. coli <=0.015-0.06 S Susceptible efflux, AcrAB-TolC in resistant isolates Potent against wild type; qnr carriage and gyrA changes shift the band sharply.
K. pneumoniae (CRE) 0.5->64 R Resistant gyrA mutation with plasmid qnr Carbapenemase producing isolates almost always carry quinolone resistance too.
A. baumannii 8->64 R Resistant efflux, AdeABC Constitutive efflux plus target changes leave little room at achievable exposure.
P. aeruginosa 0.25-2 I Intermediate efflux, MexAB-OprM Borderline: active on many isolates, lost quickly once efflux is derepressed.
E. faecium (VRE) 4->32 R Resistant target mutation, parC Enterococci are intrinsically poor fluoroquinolone targets.

Why

Ciprofloxacin is a well characterised fluoroquinolone, so the Gram-negative bands are strongly supported by published activity data. The deciding factor across this panel is not target affinity but exposure: efflux in P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii, and acquired target mutation everywhere resistance is already common. Against a modern ESKAPE panel it reads as a Gram-negative agent with two reliable losses.

Closest published analogs

  • Levofloxacin Broadly similar Gram-negative bands, better Gram-positive coverage
  • Delafloxacin Retains activity against many ciprofloxacin resistant staphylococci
Strain MIC (µg/mL) Call Resistance risk Conf.

Why

Closest published analogs

Save this screen and run the rest of your series. screen left in this session. This session is used up.

Computational prediction from published literature. Research use only, not a lab measurement and not clinical guidance.

Take it from reading to a read-out

Run a screen on the compound this page made you think about, then create an account when you want to keep the result and bring the series.

Run a screen first

What you are agreeing to

  • Your compounds stay yours
  • Never used for model training
  • Deletable on request
  • No card required to run a screen

Screen your own compound.
No card required.