Scott R Evans1, Thuy Tien T Tran1, Andrea M Hujer2,3, Carol B Hill4, Kristine M Hujer2,3, Jose R Mediavilla5, Claudia Manca5, T Nicholas Domitrovic2,3, Federico Perez2,3, Michael Farmer6, Kelsey M Pitzer6, Brigid M Wilson3, Barry N Kreiswirth5, Robin Patel7, Michael R Jacobs8, Liang Chen5, Vance G Fowler4,9, Henry F Chambers10, Robert A Bonomo2,3,11,12. 1. The Biostatistics Center and the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, George Washington University, Rockville, Maryland. 2. Department of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. 3. Louis Stokes Cleveland Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio. 4. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 5. Public Health Research Institute Center, New Jersey Medical School-Rutgers University, Newark. 6. OpGen, Gaithersburg, Maryland. 7. Division of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 8. Department of Pathology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio. 9. Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 10. University of California, San Francisco General Hospital. 11. Departments of Pharmacology, Molecular Biology and Microbiology, Biochemistry, and Proteomics and Bioinformatics, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. 12. CWRU-Cleveland VAMC Center for Antimicrobial Resistance and Epidemiology (Case VA CARES), Ohio.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Overcoming β-lactam resistance in pathogens such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a major clinical challenge. Rapid molecular diagnostics (RMDs) have the potential to inform selection of empiric therapy in patients infected by P. aeruginosa. METHODS: In this study, we used a heterogeneous collection of 197 P. aeruginosa that included multidrug-resistant isolates to determine whether 2 representative RMDs (Acuitas Resistome test and VERIGENE gram-negative blood culture test) could identify susceptibility to 2 newer β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor (BL-BLI) combinations, ceftazidime/avibactam (CZA) and ceftolozane/tazobactam (TOL/TAZO). RESULTS: We found that the studied RMD platforms were able to correctly identify BL-BLI susceptibility (susceptibility sensitivity, 100%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 97%, 100%) for both BLs-BLIs. However, their ability to detect resistance to these BLs-BLIs was lower (resistance sensitivity, 66%; 95% CI, 52%, 78% for TOL/TAZO and 33%; 95% CI, 20%, 49% for CZA). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic platforms studied showed the most potential in scenarios where a resistance gene was detected or in scenarios where a resistance gene was not detected and the prevalence of resistance to TOL/TAZO or CZA is known to be low. Clinicians need to be mindful of the benefits and risks that result from empiric treatment decisions that are based on resistance gene detection in P. aeruginosa, acknowledging that such decisions are impacted by the prevalence of resistance, which varies temporally and geographically. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2018.
BACKGROUND: Overcoming β-lactam resistance in pathogens such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a major clinical challenge. Rapid molecular diagnostics (RMDs) have the potential to inform selection of empiric therapy in patientsinfected by P. aeruginosa. METHODS: In this study, we used a heterogeneous collection of 197 P. aeruginosa that included multidrug-resistant isolates to determine whether 2 representative RMDs (Acuitas Resistome test and VERIGENE gram-negative blood culture test) could identify susceptibility to 2 newer β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor (BL-BLI) combinations, ceftazidime/avibactam (CZA) and ceftolozane/tazobactam (TOL/TAZO). RESULTS: We found that the studied RMD platforms were able to correctly identify BL-BLI susceptibility (susceptibility sensitivity, 100%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 97%, 100%) for both BLs-BLIs. However, their ability to detect resistance to these BLs-BLIs was lower (resistance sensitivity, 66%; 95% CI, 52%, 78% for TOL/TAZO and 33%; 95% CI, 20%, 49% for CZA). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic platforms studied showed the most potential in scenarios where a resistance gene was detected or in scenarios where a resistance gene was not detected and the prevalence of resistance to TOL/TAZO or CZA is known to be low. Clinicians need to be mindful of the benefits and risks that result from empiric treatment decisions that are based on resistance gene detection in P. aeruginosa, acknowledging that such decisions are impacted by the prevalence of resistance, which varies temporally and geographically. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2018.
Authors: Gabriel Cabot; Sebastian Bruchmann; Xavier Mulet; Laura Zamorano; Bartolomé Moyà; Carlos Juan; Susanne Haussler; Antonio Oliver Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Scott R Evans; Andrea M Hujer; Hongyu Jiang; Carol B Hill; Kristine M Hujer; Jose R Mediavilla; Claudia Manca; Thuy Tien T Tran; T Nicholas Domitrovic; Paul G Higgins; Harald Seifert; Barry N Kreiswirth; Robin Patel; Michael R Jacobs; Liang Chen; Rangarajan Sampath; Thomas Hall; Christine Marzan; Vance G Fowler; Henry F Chambers; Robert A Bonomo Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2016-12-28 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Michael J Satlin; Liang Chen; Gopi Patel; Angela Gomez-Simmonds; Gregory Weston; Angela C Kim; Susan K Seo; Marnie E Rosenthal; Steven J Sperber; Stephen G Jenkins; Camille L Hamula; Anne-Catrin Uhlemann; Michael H Levi; Bettina C Fries; Yi-Wei Tang; Stefan Juretschko; Albert D Rojtman; Tao Hong; Barun Mathema; Michael R Jacobs; Thomas J Walsh; Robert A Bonomo; Barry N Kreiswirth Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2017-03-24 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Federico Perez; Andrea M Hujer; Steven H Marshall; Amy J Ray; Philip N Rather; Nuntra Suwantarat; Donald Dumford; Patrick O'Shea; T Nicholas J Domitrovic; Robert A Salata; Kalyan D Chavda; Liang Chen; Barry N Kreiswirth; Alejandro J Vila; Susanne Haussler; Michael R Jacobs; Robert A Bonomo Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-07-28 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Ying Liu; Ephraim L Tsalik; Yunyun Jiang; Emily R Ko; Christopher W Woods; Ricardo Henao; Scott R Evans Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2020-06-10 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Joel A Goldberg; Ha Nguyen; Vijay Kumar; Elizabeth J Spencer; Denton Hoyer; Emma K Marshall; Anna Cmolik; Margaret O'Shea; Steven H Marshall; Andrea M Hujer; Kristine M Hujer; Susan D Rudin; T Nicholas Domitrovic; Christopher R Bethel; Krisztina M Papp-Wallace; Latania K Logan; Federico Perez; Michael R Jacobs; David van Duin; Barry M Kreiswirth; Robert A Bonomo; Mark S Plummer; Focco van den Akker Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2020-06-02 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Michael R Jacobs; Ayman M Abdelhamed; Caryn E Good; Daniel D Rhoads; Kristine M Hujer; Andrea M Hujer; T Nicholas Domitrovic; Susan D Rudin; Sandra S Richter; David van Duin; Barry N Kreiswirth; Chris Greco; Derrick E Fouts; Robert A Bonomo Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Andrea M Hujer; Christopher R Bethel; Magdalena A Taracila; Steven H Marshall; Laura J Rojas; Marisa L Winkler; Ronald E Painter; T Nicholas Domitrovic; Richard R Watkins; Ayman M Abdelhamed; Roshan D'Souza; Andrew R Mack; Richard C White; Thomas Clarke; Derrick E Fouts; Michael R Jacobs; Katherine Young; Robert A Bonomo Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2022-04-18 Impact factor: 5.938
Authors: Christian M Gill; Tomefa E Asempa; Isabella A Tickler; Caitlin Dela Cruz; Fred C Tenover; David P Nicolau Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2020-11-18 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Bryan D Lizza; Kevin D Betthauser; David J Ritchie; Scott T Micek; Marin H Kollef Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2021-06-17 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Dee Shortridge; Michael A Pfaller; S J Ryan Arends; Janet Raddatz; Daryl D DePestel; Robert K Flamm Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 3.835