Head‐to‐head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK®2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing

Andrés Ceballos-Garzon; Guillermo Garcia-Effron; Susana Cordoba; Jose Y. Rodriguez; Carlos Alvarez-Moreno; Patrice Le Pape; Claudia Marcela Parra-Giraldo; Soraya Morales-López

doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106558

Head‐to‐head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK®2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing

Andrés Ceballos-Garzon
, Guillermo Garcia-Effron
, Susana Cordoba
, Jose Y. Rodriguez
, Carlos Alvarez-Moreno
, Patrice Le Pape
, Claudia Marcela Parra-Giraldo
, Soraya Morales-López

Nantes Université
Universidad Javeriana
Universidad Nacional del Litoral
Administración Nacional de Laboratorios e Institutos de Salud "Dr. Carlos G. Malbrán"
CIMCE
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Universidad Popular del Cesar

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

24 Scopus citations

Abstract

The susceptibility of 31 Candida auris clinical isolates was evaluated by four methods, namely the microdilution reference method according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines as well as Etest and VITEK®2. Essential agreement between the two reference methods was 90%. Etest showed a better overall agreement with the reference methods (94% and 81% for CLSI and EUCAST, respectively) than VITEK®2 (70% and 72%, respectively). Discrepancies were found for fluconazole (FLC) and amphotericin B. Considering categorical agreement (CDC tentative breakpoints), the majority of isolates were considered FLC-resistant (93.6% and 80.6% by CLSI and EUCAST, respectively). Furthermore, all isolates were considered susceptible to echinocandins by all methods. Susceptibility results should be interpreted with care if the VITEK®2 system is used to guide therapeutic decisions for C. auris infections.

Original language	English
Article number	106558
Journal	International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
Volume	59
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106558
State	Published - Apr 2022

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

CLSI
Candida auris
EUCAST
Etest
Susceptibility testing

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106558

Cite this

Ceballos-Garzon, A., Garcia-Effron, G., Cordoba, S., Rodriguez, J. Y., Alvarez-Moreno, C., Pape, P. L., Parra-Giraldo, C. M., & Morales-López, S. (2022). Head‐to‐head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK®2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, 59(4), Article 106558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106558

@article{58ffca02bb7842b39dc60ebd54278680,

title = "Head‐to‐head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK{\textregistered}2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing",

abstract = "The susceptibility of 31 Candida auris clinical isolates was evaluated by four methods, namely the microdilution reference method according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines as well as Etest and VITEK{\textregistered}2. Essential agreement between the two reference methods was 90\%. Etest showed a better overall agreement with the reference methods (94\% and 81\% for CLSI and EUCAST, respectively) than VITEK{\textregistered}2 (70\% and 72\%, respectively). Discrepancies were found for fluconazole (FLC) and amphotericin B. Considering categorical agreement (CDC tentative breakpoints), the majority of isolates were considered FLC-resistant (93.6\% and 80.6\% by CLSI and EUCAST, respectively). Furthermore, all isolates were considered susceptible to echinocandins by all methods. Susceptibility results should be interpreted with care if the VITEK{\textregistered}2 system is used to guide therapeutic decisions for C. auris infections.",

keywords = "CLSI, Candida auris, EUCAST, Etest, Susceptibility testing",

author = "Andr{\'e}s Ceballos-Garzon and Guillermo Garcia-Effron and Susana Cordoba and Rodriguez, \{Jose Y.\} and Carlos Alvarez-Moreno and Pape, \{Patrice Le\} and Parra-Giraldo, \{Claudia Marcela\} and Soraya Morales-L{\'o}pez",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 Elsevier Ltd and International Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy",

year = "2022",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106558",

language = "English",

volume = "59",

journal = "International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents",

issn = "0924-8579",

publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

number = "4",

}

Ceballos-Garzon, A, Garcia-Effron, G, Cordoba, S, Rodriguez, JY, Alvarez-Moreno, C, Pape, PL, Parra-Giraldo, CM & Morales-López, S 2022, 'Head‐to‐head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK®2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing', International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, vol. 59, no. 4, 106558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106558

TY - JOUR

T1 - Head‐to‐head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK®2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing

AU - Ceballos-Garzon, Andrés

AU - Garcia-Effron, Guillermo

AU - Cordoba, Susana

AU - Rodriguez, Jose Y.

AU - Alvarez-Moreno, Carlos

AU - Pape, Patrice Le

AU - Parra-Giraldo, Claudia Marcela

AU - Morales-López, Soraya

PY - 2022/4

Y1 - 2022/4

N2 - The susceptibility of 31 Candida auris clinical isolates was evaluated by four methods, namely the microdilution reference method according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines as well as Etest and VITEK®2. Essential agreement between the two reference methods was 90%. Etest showed a better overall agreement with the reference methods (94% and 81% for CLSI and EUCAST, respectively) than VITEK®2 (70% and 72%, respectively). Discrepancies were found for fluconazole (FLC) and amphotericin B. Considering categorical agreement (CDC tentative breakpoints), the majority of isolates were considered FLC-resistant (93.6% and 80.6% by CLSI and EUCAST, respectively). Furthermore, all isolates were considered susceptible to echinocandins by all methods. Susceptibility results should be interpreted with care if the VITEK®2 system is used to guide therapeutic decisions for C. auris infections.

AB - The susceptibility of 31 Candida auris clinical isolates was evaluated by four methods, namely the microdilution reference method according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines as well as Etest and VITEK®2. Essential agreement between the two reference methods was 90%. Etest showed a better overall agreement with the reference methods (94% and 81% for CLSI and EUCAST, respectively) than VITEK®2 (70% and 72%, respectively). Discrepancies were found for fluconazole (FLC) and amphotericin B. Considering categorical agreement (CDC tentative breakpoints), the majority of isolates were considered FLC-resistant (93.6% and 80.6% by CLSI and EUCAST, respectively). Furthermore, all isolates were considered susceptible to echinocandins by all methods. Susceptibility results should be interpreted with care if the VITEK®2 system is used to guide therapeutic decisions for C. auris infections.

KW - CLSI

KW - Candida auris

KW - EUCAST

KW - Etest

KW - Susceptibility testing

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85127325120

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106558

DO - 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106558

M3 - Article

C2 - 35227828

AN - SCOPUS:85127325120

SN - 0924-8579

VL - 59

JO - International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents

JF - International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents

IS - 4

M1 - 106558

ER -

Head‐to‐head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK®2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing

Abstract

UN SDGs

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this