Literature DB >> 21981028

Susceptibility of 100 filamentous fungi: comparison of two diffusion methods, Neo-Sensitabs and E-test, for amphotericin B, caspofungin, itraconazole, voriconazole and posaconazole.

Ioana A Colosi1, Odile Faure, Bérangére Dessaigne, Cécile Bourdon, Bernadette Lebeau, Horaţiu A Colosi, Hervé Pelloux.   

Abstract

We compared the E-test method to that of the Neo-Sensitabs tablet diffusion assay for evaluating the in vitro susceptibility of 100 clinical isolates of filamentous fungi (Aspergillus spp., Fusarium spp., Scedosporium spp., zygomycetes and other molds) to amphotericin B, itraconazole, voriconazole, caspofungin, and posaconazole. We determined the categorical agreement level between E-test minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) and tablet end-points, as opposed to the following disagreement parameters: very major error - resistant parameter (R) in E-test and susceptible (S) in tablet; major error - S by E-test and R by tablet; minor error - shifts between S and susceptible dose-dependent (S-DD) or S-DD and R. We also performed linear regression analyses and computed Pearson's correlation coefficients (R values) between the log transforms of MICs and the inhibition zone diameters of the five studied antifungal agents. For itraconazole we obtained 97% categorical agreement and R = -0.727. Categorical agreement for caspofungin and voriconazole was 96% and R =-0.821 and R = -0.789, respectively. For posaconazole the categorical agreement was 94% and R =-0.743. Amphotericin B exhibited a lower degree of agreement (76%, R = -0.672), especially in studies of Aspergillus spp. Our results suggest a potential value of the Neo-Sensitabs assay for in vitro susceptibility testing of molds to itraconazole, voriconazole, caspofungin and posaconazole, while amphotericin B exhibited an overall lower degree of agreement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21981028     DOI: 10.3109/13693786.2011.616543

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Mycol        ISSN: 1369-3786            Impact factor:   4.076


  2 in total

1.  Comparative Evaluation of Etest, EUCAST, and CLSI Methods for Amphotericin B, Voriconazole, and Posaconazole against Clinically Relevant Fusarium Species.

Authors:  Abdullah M S Al-Hatmi; Anne-Cécile Normand; Stephane Ranque; Renaud Piarroux; G Sybren de Hoog; Joseph Meletiadis; Jacques F Meis
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2016-12-27       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 2.  Unpredictable susceptibility of emerging clinical moulds to tri-azoles: review of the literature and upcoming challenges for mould identification.

Authors:  R Araujo; M Oliveira; A Amorim; B Sampaio-Maia
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 3.267

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.