Advertisement

Antifungal Susceptibility Testing Methods: Non-CLSI Methods for Yeast and Moulds

  • Audrey Wanger
Chapter

Abstract

There are defined methods for performing susceptibility testing that have been published by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) for yeast and moulds. There are commercially available products for performance of the recommended broth microdilution methods that are contained in those documents. These are described in Chapter 2 of this text. In addition, there are other available methods that are described in this chapter that are culture-based and non-culture-based. These include the use of disk diffusion, Etest, chromogenic media, and molecular methods.

Keywords

Antifungal Agent Candida Species Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute Broth Microdilution Broth Microdilution Method 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Alexander BD, Byrne TC, Smith KL, Hanson KE, Anstrom KJ, Perfect JR, Reller LB (2007) Comparative evaluation of Etest and sensititre yeastone panels against the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute M27-A2 reference broth microdilution method for testing Candida susceptibility to seven antifungal agents. J Clin Microbiol 45:698–706PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antachopoulos C, Meletiadis J, Roilides E, Sein T, Walsh TJ (2006) Rapid susceptibility testing of medically important zygomycetes by XTT assay. J Clin Microbiol 44:553–560PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arthington-Skaggs BA, Jradi H, Desai T, Morrison CJ (1999) Quantitation of ergosterol content: novel method for determination of fluconazole susceptibility of Candida albicans. J Clin Microbiol 37:3332–3337PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balajee SA, Imhof A, Gribskov JL, Marr KA (2005) Determination of antifungal drug susceptibilities of Aspergillus species by a fluorescence-based microplate assay. J Antimicrob Chemother 55:102–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Balajee SA, Marr KA (2002) Conidial viability assay for rapid susceptibility testing of Aspergillus species. J Clin Microbiol 40:2741–2745PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Balashov SV, Park S, Perlin DS (2006) Assessing resistance to the echinocandin antifungal drug caspofungin in Candida albicans by profiling mutations in FKS1. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 50:2058–2063PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barry AL, Pfaller MA, Rennie RP, Fuchs PC, Brown SD (2002) Precision and accuracy of fluconazole susceptibility testing by broth microdilution, Etest, and disk diffusion methods. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46:1781–1784PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bolmström A, Arvidson S, Ericsson M, Karlsson A (1988) A Novel Technique for direct quantification of antimicrobial susceptibility of microorganisms. Poster 1209 ICAAC, Los AngelesPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cuenca-Estrella M, Moore CB, Barchiesi F, Bille J, Chryssanthou E, Denning DW, Donnelly JP, Dromer F, Dupont B, Rex JH, Richardson MD, Sancak B, Verweij PE, Rodriguez-Tudela JL (2003) Multicenter evaluation of the reproducibility of the proposed antifungal susceptibility testing method for fermentative yeasts of the Antifungal Susceptibility Testing Subcommittee of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (AFST-EUCAST). Clin Microbiol Infect 9:467–474PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davey KG, Holmes AD, Johnson EM, Szekely A, Warnock DW (1998) Comparative evaluation of FUNGITEST and broth microdilution methods for antifungal drug susceptibility testing of Candida species and Cryptococcus neoformans. J Clin Microbiol 36:926–930PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Espinel-Ingroff A (2006) Comparison of three commercial assays and a modified disk diffusion assay with two broth microdilution reference assays for testing zygomycetes, Aspergillus spp., Candida spp., and Cryptococcus neoformans with posaconazole and amphotericin B. J Clin Microbiol 44:3616–3622PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Espinel-Ingroff A, Pfaller M, Messer SA, Knapp CC, Killian S, Norris HA, Ghannoum MA (1999) Multicenter comparison of the sensititre YeastOne Colorimetric Antifungal Panel with the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M27-A reference method for testing clinical isolates of common and emerging Candida spp., Cryptococcus spp., and other yeasts and yeast-like organisms. J Clin Microbiol 37:591–595PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guinea J, Pelaez T, Alcala L, Bouza E (2007) Correlation between the Etest and the CLSI M-38 A microdilution method to determine the activity of amphotericin B, voriconazole, and itraconazole against clinical isolates of Aspergillus fumigatus. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 57:273–276PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Imhof A, Balajee SA, Marr KA (2003) New methods to assess susceptibilities of Aspergillus isolates to caspofungin. J Clin Microbiol 41:5683–5688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kartsonis N, Killar J, Mixson L, Hoe CM, Sable C, Bartizal K, Motyl M (2005) Caspofungin susceptibility testing of isolates from patients with esophageal candidiasis or invasive candidiasis: relationship of MIC to treatment outcome. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 49:3616–3623PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lewis RE, Diekema DJ, Messer SA, Pfaller MA, Klepser ME (2002) Comparison of Etest, chequerboard dilution and time-kill studies for the detection of synergy or antagonism between antifungal agents tested against Candida species. J Antimicrob Chemother 49:345–351PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liao RS, Rennie RP, Talbot JA (2001) Novel fluorescent broth microdilution method for fluconazole susceptibility testing of Candida albicans. J Clin Microbiol 39:2708–2712PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maxwell MJ, Messer SA, Hollis RJ, Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA (2003) Evaluation of Etest method for determining voriconazole and amphotericin B MICs for 162 clinical isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans. J Clin Microbiol 41:97–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Messer SA, Diekema DJ, Hollis RJ, Boyken LB, Tendolkar S, Kroeger J, Pfaller MA (2007) Evaluation of disk diffusion and Etest compared to broth microdilution antifungal susceptibility testing of posaconazole against clinical isolates of filamentous fungi. J Clin Microbiol 45:1322–1324PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Morace G, Amato G, Bistoni F, Fadda G, Marone P, Montagna MT, Oliveri S, Polonelli L, Rigoli R, Mancuso I, La Face S, Masucci L, Romano L, Napoli C, Tato D, Buscema MG, Belli CMC, Piccirillo MM, Conti S, Covan S, Fanti F, Cavanna C, D’Alo F, Pitzurra L (2002) Multicenter comparative evaluation of six commercial systems and the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M27-A broth microdilution method for fluconazole susceptibility testing of Candida species. J Clin Microbiol 40:2953–2958PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mukherjee PK, Sheehan DJ, Hitchcock CA, Ghannoum MA (2005) Combination treatment of invasive fungal infections. Clin Microbiol Rev 18:163–194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    NCCLS (2004) Reference method for antifungal disk diffusion susceptibility testing of yeasts, approved standard. NCCLS, WayneGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    NCCLS (2002) Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi, approved standard. NCCLS, WayneGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    NCCLS (2002) Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. Approved standard, 2nd edn. NCCLS, WayneGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Park S, Perlin DS (2005) Establishing surrogate markers for fluconazole resistance in Candida albicans. Microb Drug Resist 11:232–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pfaller MA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ, Messer SA, Tendolkar S, Diekema DJ (2004) Clinical evaluation of a dried commercially prepared microdilution panel for antifungal susceptibility testing of five antifungal agents against Candida spp. and Cryptococcus neoformans. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 50:113–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Procop GW, Rinaldi MG (2007) Multicenter comparison of the VITEK 2 yeast susceptibility test with the CLSI broth microdilution reference method for testing fluconazole against Candida spp. J Clin Microbiol 45:796–802PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Coffmann S (1995) Comparison of visual and spectrophotometric methods of MIC endpoint determinations by using broth microdilution methods to test five antifungal agents, including the new triazole D0870. J Clin Microbiol 33:1094–1097PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Mills K, Bolmstrom A (2000) In vitro susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi: comparison of Etest and reference microdilution methods for determining itraconazole MICs. J Clin Microbiol 38:3359–3361PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Mills K, Bolmstrom A, Jones RN (2001) Evaluation of Etest method for determining caspofungin (MK-0991) susceptibilities of 726 clinical isolates of Candida species. J Clin Microbiol 39:4387–4389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Mills K, Bolmstrom A, Jones RN (2001) Evaluation of Etest method for determining posaconazole MICs for 314 clinical isolates of Candida species. J Clin Microbiol 39:3952–3954PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pfaller MA, Sheehan DJ, Rex JH (2004) Determination of fungicidal activities against yeasts and molds: lessons learned from bactericidal testing and the need for standardization. Clin Microbiol Rev 17:268–280PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Philpot C (1993) Determination of sensitivity to antifungal drugs: evaluation of an API kit. Br J Biomed Sci 50:27–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Provine H, Hadley S (2000) Preliminary evaluation of a semisolid agar antifungal susceptibility test for yeasts and molds. J Clin Microbiol 38:537–541PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ramani R, Chaturvedi V (2000) Flow cytometry antifungal susceptibility testing of pathogenic yeasts other than Candida albicans and comparison with the NCCLS broth microdilution test. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 44:2752–2758PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rex JH, Pappas PG, Karchmer AW, Sobel J, Edwards JE, Hadley S, Brass C, Vazquez JA, Chapman SW, Horowitz HW, Zervos M, McKinsey D, Lee J, Babinchak T, Bradsher RW, Cleary JD, Cohen DM, Danziger L, Goldman M, Goodman J, Hilton E, Hyslop NE, Kett DH, Lutz J, Rubin RH, Scheld WM, Schuster M, Simmons B, Stein DK, Washburn RG, Mautner L, Chu TC, Panzer H, Rosenstein RB, Booth J (2003) A randomized and blinded multicenter trial of high-dose fluconazole plus placebo versus fluconazole plus amphotericin B as therapy for candidemia and its consequences in nonneutropenic subjects. Clin Infect Dis 36:1221–1228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rex JH, Pfaller MA, Walsh TJ, Chaturvedi V, Espinel-Ingroff A, Ghannoum MA, Gosey LL, Odds FC, Rinaldi MG, Sheehan DJ, Warnock DW (2001) Antifungal susceptibility testing: practical aspects and current challenges. Clin Microbiol Rev 14:643–658, table of contentsPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ribeiro MA, Paula CR (2007) Up-regulation of ERG11 gene among fluconazole-resistant Candida albicans generated in vitro: is there any clinical implication? Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 57:71–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Riesselman MH, Hazen KC, Cutler JE (2000) Determination of antifungal MICs by a rapid susceptibility assay. J Clin Microbiol 38:333–340PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sims CR, Paetznick VL, Rodriguez JR, Chen E, Ostrosky-Zeichner L (2006) Correlation between microdilution, E-test, and disk diffusion methods for antifungal susceptibility testing of posaconazole against Candida spp. J Clin Microbiol 44:2105–2108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Steinbach WJ, Stevens DA, Denning DW (2003) Combination and sequential antifungal therapy for invasive aspergillosis: review of published in vitro and in vivo interactions and 6281 clinical cases from 1966 to 2001. Clin Infect Dis 37(Suppl 3):S188–S224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Szekely A, Johnson EM, Warnock DW (1999) Comparison of E-test and broth microdilution methods for antifungal drug susceptibility testing of molds. J Clin Microbiol 37:1480–1483PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tan GL, Peterson EM (2005) CHROMagar Candida medium for direct susceptibility testing of yeast from blood cultures. J Clin Microbiol 43:1727–1731PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    van Eldere J, Joosten L, Verhaeghe V, Surmont I (1996) Fluconazole and amphotericin B antifungal susceptibility testing by National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards broth macrodilution method compared with E-test and semiautomated broth microdilution test. J Clin Microbiol 34:842–847PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vandenbossche I, Vaneechoutte M, Vandevenne M, De Baere T, Verschraegen G (2002) Susceptibility testing of fluconazole by the NCCLS broth macrodilution method, E-Test, and disk diffusion for application in the routine laboratory. J Clin Microbiol 40:918–921PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wanger A, Mills K, Nelson P, Rex J (1995) Comparison of Etest and National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards broth macrodilution method for antifungal susceptibility testing: enhanced ability to detect amphotericin B-resistant Candida isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 39:2520–2522PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Willinger B, Engelmann E, Hofmann H, Metzger S, Apfalter P, Hirschl AM, Makristathis A, Rotter M, Raddatz B, Seibold M (2002) Multicenter comparison of Fungitest for susceptibility testing of Candida species. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 44:253–257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Xu J, Vilgalys R, Mitchell TG (1998) Colony size can be used to determine the MIC of fluconazole for pathogenic yeasts. J Clin Microbiol 36:2383–2385PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zambardi G, Parreno D, Monnin V, Fothergill A, Hurt L, Bassel A, McCarthy D, Canard I, Slaughter J (2005) Presented at the interscience conference on antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, Washington, DC. Rapid antifungal susceptibility testing of medically important yeasts with the VITEK 2 systemGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PathologyUniversity of Texas Medical SchoolHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations