Literature DB >> 34780269

Real-World Performance of Susceptibility Testing for Ceftolozane/Tazobactam against Non-Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Ayesha Khan1, José M Munita2,3, Lina Rivas2,3, Manuel Alcalde-Rico4,3, José R W Martínez2,3, María Victoria Moreno5, Pamela Rojas6, Aniela Wozniak7,8, Patricia García3,7,8, Jorge Olivares-Pacheco4,3, William R Miller1, Cesar A Arias1,9.   

Abstract

Ceftolozane/tazbactam (C/T) is a potent anti-pseudomonal agent that has clinical utility against infections caused by non-carbapenemase, producing-carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (non-CP-CR-PA). Accurate, precise, and reliable antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is crucial to guide clinical decisions. However, studies assessing the performance of different AST methods against non-CP-CR-PA (the main clinical niche for C/T), are lacking. Here, we evaluated performance of gradient strips (Etest and MIC test strip [MTS], and disk diffusion [DD]) using CLSI breakpoints. Additionally, we assessed the performance of DD using EUCAST breakpoints. For all susceptibility tests, we used a collection of 97 non-CP-CR-PA clinical isolates recovered from 11 Chilean hospitals. Both gradient strips and DD had acceptable performance when using CLSI breakpoints, yielding a categorical agreement (CA) of >90% and 92%, respectively. In contrast, DD using EUCAST breakpoints performed suboptimally (CA 81%). MTS yielded a higher essential agreement (EA, >90%) than Etest (84%). Importantly, the performance of all methods varied significantly when the isolates were stratified by their degree of susceptibility to other anti-pseudomonal β-lactams. All methods had 100% CA when testing isolates that were pan-susceptible to all β-lactams (Pan-β-S). However, the CA markedly decreased when testing isolates resistant to all β-lactams (Pan-β-R). Indeed, the CA was 81% for Etest (six errors), 78% for MTS (seven errors), and 78% and 56% for DD when using CLSI (seven errors) or EUCAST breakpoints (14 errors), respectively. Our results suggest that all manual AST methods have strikingly decreased performance in the context of Pan-β-R P. aeruginosa with potentially major clinical implications.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gram-negative bacteria; Pseudomonas; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; antibiotic resistance; antimicrobial activity; beta-lactams; bloodstream infections; carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa; ceftolozane/tazobactam; infectious disease; multidrug resistance; non-carbapenemase-producing; susceptibility testing

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34780269      PMCID: PMC8765422          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01657-21

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.938


  23 in total

1.  Ceftolozane-tazobactam compared with levofloxacin in the treatment of complicated urinary-tract infections, including pyelonephritis: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial (ASPECT-cUTI).

Authors:  Florian M Wagenlehner; Obiamiwe Umeh; Judith Steenbergen; Guojun Yuan; Rabih O Darouiche
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Mechanisms leading to in vivo ceftolozane/tazobactam resistance development during the treatment of infections caused by MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Pablo A Fraile-Ribot; Gabriel Cabot; Xavier Mulet; Leonor Periañez; M Luisa Martín-Pena; Carlos Juan; José L Pérez; Antonio Oliver
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 5.790

3.  Multicenter Evaluation of the Etest Gradient Diffusion Method for Ceftolozane-Tazobactam Susceptibility Testing of Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Adam L Bailey; Tom Armstrong; Hari-Prakash Dwivedi; Gerald A Denys; Janet Hindler; Shelley Campeau; Maria Traczewski; Romney Humphries; C A Burnham
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-08-27       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Verification of Ceftazidime-Avibactam and Ceftolozane-Tazobactam Susceptibility Testing Methods against Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Ryan K Shields; Cornelius J Clancy; A William Pasculle; Ellen G Press; Ghady Haidar; Binghua Hao; Liang Chen; Barry N Kreiswirth; M Hong Nguyen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Ceftolozane-Tazobactam for the Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infections: Clinical Effectiveness and Evolution of Resistance.

Authors:  Ghady Haidar; Nathan J Philips; Ryan K Shields; Daniel Snyder; Shaoji Cheng; Brian A Potoski; Yohei Doi; Binghua Hao; Ellen G Press; Vaughn S Cooper; Cornelius J Clancy; M Hong Nguyen
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  Antimicrobial activity of ceftolozane-tazobactam against multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates from a Spanish hospital.

Authors:  A I López-Calleja; E Morilla Morales; R Nuñez Medina; M Fernández Esgueva; J Sahagún Pareja; J M García-Lechuz Moya; I Ferrer Cerón; J Viñuelas Bayon; A Rezusta López
Journal:  Rev Esp Quimioter       Date:  2018-12-14       Impact factor: 1.553

7.  Comparison of the In Vitro Susceptibility of Ceftolozane-Tazobactam With the Cumulative Susceptibility Rates of Standard Antibiotic Combinations When Tested Against Pseudomonas aeruginosa From ICU Patients With Bloodstream Infections or Pneumonia.

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

8.  Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Resistance and Mechanisms in Carbapenem-Nonsusceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  Jocelyn Qi-Min Teo; Jie Chong Lim; Rick Twee-Hee Ong; Andrea Lay-Hoon Kwa; Cheng Yee Tang; Shannon Jing-Yi Lee; Si Hui Tan; James Heng-Chiak Sim
Journal:  mSphere       Date:  2021-01-27       Impact factor: 4.389

9.  Susceptibility of MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa to ceftolozane/tazobactam and comparison of different susceptibility testing methods.

Authors:  Frieder Schaumburg; Stefan Bletz; Alexander Mellmann; Karsten Becker; Evgeny A Idelevich
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 5.790

10.  Collective assessment of antimicrobial susceptibility among the most common Gram-negative respiratory pathogens driving therapy in the ICU.

Authors:  Pamela A Moise; Marcela Gonzalez; Irina Alekseeva; Diego Lopez; Brune Akrich; C Andrew DeRyke; Wei-Ting Chen; Jacqueline Pavia; Brandon Palermo; Meredith Hackel; Mary Motyl
Journal:  JAC Antimicrob Resist       Date:  2021-02-19
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  In search for a synergistic combination against pandrug-resistant A. baumannii; methodological considerations.

Authors:  Stamatis Karakonstantis; Petros Ioannou; Diamantis D Kofteridis
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 3.553

2.  Role of the multi-drug efflux systems on the baseline susceptibility to ceftazidime/avibactam and ceftolozane/tazobactam in clinical isolates of non-carbapenemase-producing carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Authors:  María José Contreras-Gómez; José R W Martinez; Lina Rivas; Roberto Riquelme-Neira; Juan A Ugalde; Aniela Wozniak; Patricia García; José M Munita; Jorge Olivares-Pacheco; Manuel Alcalde-Rico
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-10-03       Impact factor: 5.988

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.