| Literature DB >> 27795379 |
Abdullah M S Al-Hatmi1,2,3, Anne-Cécile Normand4, Stephane Ranque4, Renaud Piarroux4, G Sybren de Hoog5,2, Joseph Meletiadis6,7, Jacques F Meis8,9.
Abstract
We compared EUCAST and CLSI methods versus Etest for antifungal susceptibility testing of 20 clinically relevant Fusarium species against amphotericin B, posaconazole, and voriconazole. The median Etest amphotericin B and posaconazole MICs were 1 dilution higher than the median EUCAST and the CLSI MICs. The essential agreement (within ±1/±2 dilutions) was 60/90%, 80/95%, and 70/85% between the Etest and EUCAST methods and 80/95%, 75/95%, and 45/100% between the Etest and CLSI methods for amphotericin B, voriconazole, and posaconazole, respectively. The categorical agreement was >85%. Etest can be used for antifungal susceptibility testing of Fusarium species.Entities:
Keywords: CLSI; EUCAST; Etest; Fusarium; RPB2; TEF1; amphotericin B; antifungal susceptibility; comparison; posaconazole; voriconazole
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27795379 PMCID: PMC5192122 DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01671-16
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother ISSN: 0066-4804 Impact factor: 5.191