Microbes are known to colonize surfaces and form biofilms. These biofilms are communities of microbes encased in a self-produced matrix that often contains polysaccharides, DNA and proteins. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have been used to control the formation and to eradicate mature biofilms. Naturally occurring or synthetic antimicrobial peptides have been shown to prevent microbial colonization of surfaces, to kill bacteria in biofilms and to disrupt the biofilm structure. This review systemically analyzed published data since 1970 to summarize the possible anti-biofilm mechanisms of AMPs. One hundred and sixty-two published reports were initially selected for this review following searches using the criteria ‘antimicrobial peptide’ OR ‘peptide’ AND ‘mechanism of action’ AND ‘biofilm’ OR ‘antibiofilm’ in the databases PubMed; Scopus; Web of Science; MEDLINE; and Cochrane Library. Studies that investigated anti-biofilm activities without describing the possible mechanisms were removed from the analysis. A total of 17 original reports were included which have articulated the mechanism of antimicrobial action of AMPs against biofilms. The major anti-biofilm mechanisms of antimicrobial peptides are: (1) disruption or degradation of the membrane potential of biofilm embedded cells; (2) interruption of bacterial cell signaling systems; (3) degradation of the polysaccharide and biofilm matrix; (4) inhibition of the alarmone system to avoid the bacterial stringent response; (5) downregulation of genes responsible for biofilm formation and transportation of binding proteins.

Mel4 is a novel cationic peptide with potent activity against Gram-positive bacteria. The current study examined the anti-staphylococcal mechanism of action of Mel4 and its precursor peptide melimine. The interaction of peptides with lipoteichoic acid (LTA) and with the cytoplasmic membrane using DiSC(3)-5, Sytox green, Syto-9 and PI dyes were studied. Release of ATP and DNA/RNA from cells exposed to the peptides were determined. Bacteriolysis and autolysin-activated cell death were determined by measuring decreases in OD_620nm and killing of Micrococcus lysodeikticus cells by cell-free media. Both peptides bound to LTA and rapidly dissipated the membrane potential (within 30 seconds) without affecting bacterial viability. Disturbance of the membrane potential was followed by the release of ATP (50% of total cellular ATP) by melimine and by Mel4 (20%) after 2 minutes exposure (p<0.001). Mel4 resulted in staphylococcal cells taking up PI with 3.9% cells predominantly stained after 150 min exposure, whereas melimine showed 34% staining. Unlike melimine, Mel4 did not release DNA/RNA. Cell-free media from Mel4 treated cells hydrolysed peptidoglycan and produced greater zones of inhibition against M. lysodeikticus lawn than melimine treated samples. These findings suggest that pore formation is unlikely to be involved in Mel4-mediated membrane destabilization for staphylococci, since there was no significant Mel4-induced PI staining and DNA/RNA leakage. It is likely that the S. aureus killing mechanism of Mel4 involves the release of autolysins followed by cell death. Whereas, membrane interaction is the primary bactericidal activity of melimine, which includes membrane depolarization, pore formation, release of cellular contents leading to cell death.

Melimine and Mel4 are chimeric cationic peptides with broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. They have been shown to be highly biocompatible in animal models and human clinical trials. The current study examined the mechanism of action of these two antimicrobial peptides against P. aeruginosa. The effect of the peptides of endotoxin neutralization, and their interactions with cytoplasmic membranes using DiSC(3)-5 and Sytox green, Syto-9 and PI dyes were analysed. Release of ATP and DNA/RNA were determined using ATP luminescence and increase in OD_260 nm. The bacteriolytic ability of the peptides was determined by measuring decreases in OD_620 nm. Both the peptides neutralized LPS suggesting their interaction with lipid A. Cytoplasmic membrane was disrupted within 30 seconds, which correlated with reductions in cellular viability. At 2 minutes melimine or Mel4, released 75% and 36% cellular ATP respectively (P < 0.001). Membrane permeabilization started 5 minutes with simultaneous release of DNA/RNA. Flow cytometry demonstrated 52% and 18% bacteria were stained with PI after 30 minutes. Overall, melimine showed higher capacity for membrane disruption compared to Mel4 (P < 0.001). The findings of this study have been summarized as a timeline of bactericidal activity, suggesting that the peptides permeabilized P. aeruginosa within 5 minutes, started lysis within 2 hours of exposure.

Bacterial colonization and biofilm development on medical devices can lead to infection. Antimicrobial peptide-coated surfaces may prevent such infections. Melimine and Mel4 are chimeric cationic peptides showing broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity once attached to biomaterials and are highly biocompatible in animal models and have been tested in Phase I and II/III human clinical trials. These peptides were covalently attached to glass using an azidobenzoic acid linker. Peptide attachment was confirmed using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and amino acid analysis. Mel4 when bound to glass was able to adopt a more ordered structure in the presence of bacterial membrane mimetic lipids. The ability of surface bound peptides to neutralize endotoxin was measured along with their interactions with the bacterial cytoplasmic membrane which were analyzed using DiSC(3)-5 and Sytox green, Syto-9, and PI dyes with fluorescence microscopy. Leakage of ATP and nucleic acids from cells were determined by analyzing the surrounding fluid. Attachment of the peptides resulted in increases in the percentage of nitrogen by 3.0% and 2.4%, and amino acid concentrations to 0.237 nmole and 0.298 nmole per coverslip on melimine and Mel4 coated surfaces, respectively. The immobilized peptides bound lipopolysaccharide and disrupted the cytoplasmic membrane potential of Pseudomonas aeruginosa within 15 min. Membrane depolarization was associated with a reduction in bacterial viability by 82% and 63% for coatings melimine and Mel4, respectively (p < 0.001). Disruption of membrane potential was followed by leakage of ATP from melimine (1.5 ± 0.4 nM) or Mel4 (1.3 ± 0.2 nM) coated surfaces compared to uncoated glass after 2 h (p < 0.001). Sytox green influx started after 3 h incubation with either peptide. Melimine coatings yielded 59% and Mel4 gave 36% PI stained cells after 4 h. Release of the larger molecules (DNA/RNA) commenced after 4 h for melimine (1.8 ± 0.9 times more than control; p = 0.008) and after 6 h with Mel4 (2.1 ± 0.2 times more than control; p < 0.001). The mechanism of action of surface bound melimine and Mel4 was similar to that of the peptides in solution, however, their immobilization resulted in much slower (approximately 30 times) kinetics.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is increasingly resistant to conventional antibiotics, which can be compounded by the formation of biofilms on surfaces conferring additional resistance. P. aeruginosa was grown in sub-inhibitory concentrations of the antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) melimine and Mel4 or ciprofloxacin for 30 consecutive days to induce the development of resistance. Antibiofilm effect of AMPs and ciprofloxacin was evaluated using crystal violet and live/dead staining with confocal microscopy. Effect on the cell membrane of biofilm cells was evaluated using DiSC(3)-5 dye and release of intracellular ATP and DNA/RNA. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of ciprofloxacin increased 64-fold after 30 passages, but did not increase for melimine or Mel4. Ciprofloxacin could not inhibit biofilm formation of resistant cells at 4× MIC, but both AMPs reduced biofilms by >75% at 1× MIC. At 1× MIC, only the combination of either AMP with ciprofloxacin was able to significantly disrupt pre-formed biofilms (≥61%; p < 0.001). Only AMPs depolarized the cell membranes of biofilm cells at 1× MIC. At 1× MIC either AMP with ciprofloxacin released a significant amount of ATP (p < 0.04), but did not release DNA/RNA. AMPs do not easily induce resistance in P. aeruginosa and can be used in combination with ciprofloxacin to treat biofilm.

Staphylococcus aureus can develop resistance by mutation, transfection or biofilm formation. Resistance was induced in S. aureus by growth in sub-inhibitory concentrations of ciprofloxacin for 30 days. The ability of the antimicrobials to disrupt biofilms was determined using crystal violet and live/dead staining. Effects on the cell membranes of biofilm cells were evaluated by measuring release of dyes and ATP, and nucleic acids. None of the strains developed resistance to AMPs while only S. aureus ATCC 25923 developed resistance (128 times) to ciprofloxacin after 30 passages. Only peptides reduced biofilms of ciprofloxacin-resistant cells. The antibiofilm effect of melimine with ciprofloxacin was more (27%) than with melimine alone at 1X MIC (p < 0.001). Similarly, at 1X MIC the combination of Mel4 and ciprofloxacin produced more (48%) biofilm disruption than Mel4 alone (p < 0.001). Combinations of either of the peptides with ciprofloxacin at 2X MIC released ≥ 66 nM ATP, more than either peptide alone (p ≤ 0.005). At 2X MIC, only melimine in combination with ciprofloxacin released DNA/RNA which was three times more than that released by melimine alone (p = 0.043). These results suggest the potential use of melimine and Mel4 with conventional antibiotics for the treatment of S. aureus biofilms.