Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method
BSTRACT Method-dependent Etest epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) are not available for susceptibility testing of either Candida or Aspergillus species with amphotericin B or echinocandins. In addition, reference caspofungin MICs for Candida spp. are unreliable. Candida and Aspergillus species wil...
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | inglés |
| Publicado: |
American Society for Microbiology
2016
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://eprints.uanl.mx/18265/1/554.pdf |
| _version_ | 1824415190566830080 |
|---|---|
| author | Espinel Ingroff, A. Arendrup, M. Cantón, E. Córdoba, S. Dannaoui, E. García Rodríguez, Juan González González, Gloria María Govender, N. P. Martín Mazuelos, E. Lackner, Michaela Lass Flörl, Cornelia Linares Sicilia, M. J. Rodríguez Iglesias, M. A. Pelaez, T. Shields, R. K. García Effron, G. Guinea, J. Sanguinetti, M. Turnidge, J. |
| author_facet | Espinel Ingroff, A. Arendrup, M. Cantón, E. Córdoba, S. Dannaoui, E. García Rodríguez, Juan González González, Gloria María Govender, N. P. Martín Mazuelos, E. Lackner, Michaela Lass Flörl, Cornelia Linares Sicilia, M. J. Rodríguez Iglesias, M. A. Pelaez, T. Shields, R. K. García Effron, G. Guinea, J. Sanguinetti, M. Turnidge, J. |
| author_sort | Espinel Ingroff, A. |
| collection | Repositorio Institucional |
| description | BSTRACT Method-dependent Etest epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) are not available for susceptibility testing of either Candida or Aspergillus species with amphotericin B or echinocandins. In addition, reference caspofungin MICs for Candida spp. are unreliable. Candida and Aspergillus species wild-type (WT) Etest MIC distributions (microorganisms in a species-drug combination with no detectable phenotypic resistance) were established for 4,341 Candida albicans, 113 C. dubliniensis, 1,683 C. glabrata species complex (SC), 709 C. krusei, 767 C. parapsilosis SC, 796 C. tropicalis, 1,637 Aspergillus fumigatus SC, 238 A. flavus SC, 321 A. niger SC, and 247 A. terreus SC isolates. Etest MICs from 15 laboratories (in Argentina, Europe, Mexico, South Africa, and the United States) were pooled to establish Etest ECVs. Anidulafungin, caspofungin, micafungin, and amphotericin B ECVs (in micrograms per milliliter) encompassing �97.5% of the statistically modeled population were 0.016, 0.5, 0.03, and 1 for C. albicans; 0.03, 1, 0.03, and 2 for C. glabrata SC; 0.06, 1, 0.25, and 4 for C. krusei; 8, 4, 2, and 2 forC. parapsilosis SC; and 0.03, 1, 0.12, and 2 for C. tropicalis. The amphotericin B ECV was 0.25 � g/ml for C. dubliniensis and 2, 8, 2, and 16 � g/ml for the complexes of A. fumigatus, A. flavus, A. niger, and A. terreus, respectively. While anidulafung in Etest ECVs classified 92% of the Candida fks mutants evaluated as non-WT, the performance was lower for caspofungin (75%) and micafungin (84%) cutoffs. Finally, although anidulafungin (as an echinocandin surrogate susceptibility marker) and amphotericin B ECVs should identify Candida and Aspergillus isolates with reduced susceptibility to these agents using the Etest, these ECVs will not categorize a fungal isolate as susceptible or resistant, as breakpoints do.
KEYWORDS ECVs, Etest ECVs, Etest MICs Candida, Etest MICs Aspergillus, WT isolates, amphotericin B resistance, antifungal resistance, echinocandin resistance, non-WT, susceptibility marker |
| format | Article |
| id | eprints-18265 |
| institution | UANL |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publisher | American Society for Microbiology |
| record_format | eprints |
| spelling | eprints-182652024-03-05T17:55:55Z http://eprints.uanl.mx/18265/ Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method Espinel Ingroff, A. Arendrup, M. Cantón, E. Córdoba, S. Dannaoui, E. García Rodríguez, Juan González González, Gloria María Govender, N. P. Martín Mazuelos, E. Lackner, Michaela Lass Flörl, Cornelia Linares Sicilia, M. J. Rodríguez Iglesias, M. A. Pelaez, T. Shields, R. K. García Effron, G. Guinea, J. Sanguinetti, M. Turnidge, J. R Medicina en General BSTRACT Method-dependent Etest epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) are not available for susceptibility testing of either Candida or Aspergillus species with amphotericin B or echinocandins. In addition, reference caspofungin MICs for Candida spp. are unreliable. Candida and Aspergillus species wild-type (WT) Etest MIC distributions (microorganisms in a species-drug combination with no detectable phenotypic resistance) were established for 4,341 Candida albicans, 113 C. dubliniensis, 1,683 C. glabrata species complex (SC), 709 C. krusei, 767 C. parapsilosis SC, 796 C. tropicalis, 1,637 Aspergillus fumigatus SC, 238 A. flavus SC, 321 A. niger SC, and 247 A. terreus SC isolates. Etest MICs from 15 laboratories (in Argentina, Europe, Mexico, South Africa, and the United States) were pooled to establish Etest ECVs. Anidulafungin, caspofungin, micafungin, and amphotericin B ECVs (in micrograms per milliliter) encompassing �97.5% of the statistically modeled population were 0.016, 0.5, 0.03, and 1 for C. albicans; 0.03, 1, 0.03, and 2 for C. glabrata SC; 0.06, 1, 0.25, and 4 for C. krusei; 8, 4, 2, and 2 forC. parapsilosis SC; and 0.03, 1, 0.12, and 2 for C. tropicalis. The amphotericin B ECV was 0.25 � g/ml for C. dubliniensis and 2, 8, 2, and 16 � g/ml for the complexes of A. fumigatus, A. flavus, A. niger, and A. terreus, respectively. While anidulafung in Etest ECVs classified 92% of the Candida fks mutants evaluated as non-WT, the performance was lower for caspofungin (75%) and micafungin (84%) cutoffs. Finally, although anidulafungin (as an echinocandin surrogate susceptibility marker) and amphotericin B ECVs should identify Candida and Aspergillus isolates with reduced susceptibility to these agents using the Etest, these ECVs will not categorize a fungal isolate as susceptible or resistant, as breakpoints do. KEYWORDS ECVs, Etest ECVs, Etest MICs Candida, Etest MICs Aspergillus, WT isolates, amphotericin B resistance, antifungal resistance, echinocandin resistance, non-WT, susceptibility marker American Society for Microbiology 2016-10-16 Article PeerReviewed text en cc_by_nc_nd http://eprints.uanl.mx/18265/1/554.pdf http://eprints.uanl.mx/18265/1.haspreviewThumbnailVersion/554.pdf Espinel Ingroff, A. y Arendrup, M. y Cantón, E. y Córdoba, S. y Dannaoui, E. y García Rodríguez, Juan y González González, Gloria María y Govender, N. P. y Martín Mazuelos, E. y Lackner, Michaela y Lass Flörl, Cornelia y Linares Sicilia, M. J. y Rodríguez Iglesias, M. A. y Pelaez, T. y Shields, R. K. y García Effron, G. y Guinea, J. y Sanguinetti, M. y Turnidge, J. (2016) Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 61 (1). pp. 1-10. ISSN 0066-4804 http://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01792-16 doi:10.1128/AAC.01792-16 |
| spellingShingle | R Medicina en General Espinel Ingroff, A. Arendrup, M. Cantón, E. Córdoba, S. Dannaoui, E. García Rodríguez, Juan González González, Gloria María Govender, N. P. Martín Mazuelos, E. Lackner, Michaela Lass Flörl, Cornelia Linares Sicilia, M. J. Rodríguez Iglesias, M. A. Pelaez, T. Shields, R. K. García Effron, G. Guinea, J. Sanguinetti, M. Turnidge, J. Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method |
| thumbnail | https://rediab.uanl.mx/themes/sandal5/images/online.png |
| title | Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method |
| title_full | Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method |
| title_fullStr | Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method |
| title_full_unstemmed | Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method |
| title_short | Multicenter Study of Method-Dependent Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. to Amphotericin B and Echinocandins for the Etest Agar Diffusion Method |
| title_sort | multicenter study of method dependent epidemiological cutoff values for detection of resistance in candida spp and aspergillus spp to amphotericin b and echinocandins for the etest agar diffusion method |
| topic | R Medicina en General |
| url | http://eprints.uanl.mx/18265/1/554.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT espinelingroffa multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT arendrupm multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT cantone multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT cordobas multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT dannaouie multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT garciarodriguezjuan multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT gonzalezgonzalezgloriamaria multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT govendernp multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT martinmazuelose multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT lacknermichaela multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT lassflorlcornelia multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT linaressiciliamj multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT rodrigueziglesiasma multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT pelaezt multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT shieldsrk multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT garciaeffrong multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT guineaj multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT sanguinettim multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod AT turnidgej multicenterstudyofmethoddependentepidemiologicalcutoffvaluesfordetectionofresistanceincandidasppandaspergillusspptoamphotericinbandechinocandinsfortheetestagardiffusionmethod |