OBJECTIVES: To compare the concordance of ceftaroline MIC values by reference broth microdilution (BMD) and Etest (bioMérieux, France) for MSSA and MRSA isolates obtained from PREMIUM (D372SL00001), a European multicentre study. METHODS: Ceftaroline MICs were determined by reference BMD and by Etest for 1242 MSSA and MRSA isolates collected between February and May 2012 from adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia or complicated skin and soft tissue infections; tests were performed across six European laboratories. Selected isolates with ceftaroline resistance in broth (MIC >1 mg/L) were retested in three central laboratories to confirm their behaviour. RESULTS: Overall concordance between BMD and Etest was good, with >97% essential agreement and >95% categorical agreement. Nevertheless, 12 of the 26 MRSA isolates found resistant by BMD scored as susceptible by Etest, with MICs ≤1 mg/L, thus counting as very major errors, whereas only 5 of 380 MRSA isolates found ceftaroline susceptible in BMD were miscategorized as resistant by Etest. Twenty-one of the 26 isolates with MICs of 2 mg/L by BMD were then retested twice by each of three central laboratories: BMD MICs of 2 mg/L were consistently found for 19 of the 21 isolates. Among 147 Etest results for these 21 isolates (original plus six repeats per isolate) 112 were >1 mg/L. CONCLUSIONS: BMD and Etest have good overall agreement for ceftaroline against Staphylococcus aureus; nevertheless, reliable Etest-based discrimination of the minority of ceftaroline-resistant (MIC 2 mg/L) MRSA is extremely challenging, requiring careful reading of strips, ideally with duplicate testing.

Etest® versus broth microdilution for ceftaroline MIC determination with Staphylococcus aureus: results from PREMIUM, a European multicentre study / Cantón, R; Livermore, Dm; Morosini, Mi; Díaz Regañón, J; Rossolini, Gm; Verhaegen, J; Cartuyvels, R; Claeys, G; Beenhouwer, De; H, ; Delmée, M; Denis, O; Glupczynski, Y; Leven, G; Melin, P; Pierard, D; Pagani, L; Arena, F; Luzzaro, F; Gesu, Gp; Serra, R; D'Argenio, A; Sarti, M; Pecile, P; Mazzariol, A; Biscaro, V; Manso, E; Catania, MARIA ROSARIA; Giraldi, C; Stefani, S; Labonia, M; Aschbacher, R; Giammanco, A; Cristino, M; Sancho, L; Diogo, Jm; Ramalheira, E; Ramos, H; Pinheiro, D; García Castillo, M; Calvo, J; Oliver, A; Gimeno, C; Pascual, A; Quintano, Ft; Bartolomé, R; Cisterna, R; Cercenado, E; Merino, P; Marco, F; Bou, G; Sánchez, Jeg; Jeg, ; Cilla, G; Iglesias, Mr; Droz, S; Frei, R; James, D; Mushtaq, S; Howe, R; Paton, R; Gould, K; Eyre, A; Jepson, A; Swann, A; Weston, D; Harvey, G; Humphrey, H.. - In: JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY. - ISSN 1460-2091. - 72:2(2017), pp. 431-436. [10.1093/jac/dkw442]

Etest® versus broth microdilution for ceftaroline MIC determination with Staphylococcus aureus: results from PREMIUM, a European multicentre study.

CATANIA, MARIA ROSARIA;
2017

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the concordance of ceftaroline MIC values by reference broth microdilution (BMD) and Etest (bioMérieux, France) for MSSA and MRSA isolates obtained from PREMIUM (D372SL00001), a European multicentre study. METHODS: Ceftaroline MICs were determined by reference BMD and by Etest for 1242 MSSA and MRSA isolates collected between February and May 2012 from adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia or complicated skin and soft tissue infections; tests were performed across six European laboratories. Selected isolates with ceftaroline resistance in broth (MIC >1 mg/L) were retested in three central laboratories to confirm their behaviour. RESULTS: Overall concordance between BMD and Etest was good, with >97% essential agreement and >95% categorical agreement. Nevertheless, 12 of the 26 MRSA isolates found resistant by BMD scored as susceptible by Etest, with MICs ≤1 mg/L, thus counting as very major errors, whereas only 5 of 380 MRSA isolates found ceftaroline susceptible in BMD were miscategorized as resistant by Etest. Twenty-one of the 26 isolates with MICs of 2 mg/L by BMD were then retested twice by each of three central laboratories: BMD MICs of 2 mg/L were consistently found for 19 of the 21 isolates. Among 147 Etest results for these 21 isolates (original plus six repeats per isolate) 112 were >1 mg/L. CONCLUSIONS: BMD and Etest have good overall agreement for ceftaroline against Staphylococcus aureus; nevertheless, reliable Etest-based discrimination of the minority of ceftaroline-resistant (MIC 2 mg/L) MRSA is extremely challenging, requiring careful reading of strips, ideally with duplicate testing.
2017
Etest® versus broth microdilution for ceftaroline MIC determination with Staphylococcus aureus: results from PREMIUM, a European multicentre study / Cantón, R; Livermore, Dm; Morosini, Mi; Díaz Regañón, J; Rossolini, Gm; Verhaegen, J; Cartuyvels, R; Claeys, G; Beenhouwer, De; H, ; Delmée, M; Denis, O; Glupczynski, Y; Leven, G; Melin, P; Pierard, D; Pagani, L; Arena, F; Luzzaro, F; Gesu, Gp; Serra, R; D'Argenio, A; Sarti, M; Pecile, P; Mazzariol, A; Biscaro, V; Manso, E; Catania, MARIA ROSARIA; Giraldi, C; Stefani, S; Labonia, M; Aschbacher, R; Giammanco, A; Cristino, M; Sancho, L; Diogo, Jm; Ramalheira, E; Ramos, H; Pinheiro, D; García Castillo, M; Calvo, J; Oliver, A; Gimeno, C; Pascual, A; Quintano, Ft; Bartolomé, R; Cisterna, R; Cercenado, E; Merino, P; Marco, F; Bou, G; Sánchez, Jeg; Jeg, ; Cilla, G; Iglesias, Mr; Droz, S; Frei, R; James, D; Mushtaq, S; Howe, R; Paton, R; Gould, K; Eyre, A; Jepson, A; Swann, A; Weston, D; Harvey, G; Humphrey, H.. - In: JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY. - ISSN 1460-2091. - 72:2(2017), pp. 431-436. [10.1093/jac/dkw442]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11588/667738
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact