Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, May 1999, p. 1289-1290, Vol. 43, No. 5
Department of Medicine, Division of
Infectious Diseases, University of Florida College of Medicine, and
VA Medical Center, Gainesville, Florida
Received 8 July 1998/Returned for modification 8 October
1998/Accepted 11 March 1999
Ninety-nine Candida bloodstream isolates underwent
testing for susceptibility to amphotericin B by the E test, and the
results were correlated with patients' responses to amphotericin B. The MICs for isolates that were associated with therapeutic failure were significantly higher than the MICs for those associated with therapeutic success. A MIC of The proposal of interpretive
breakpoint MICs of fluconazole and itraconazole that identify
Candida isolates likely to fail to respond to therapy with
these agents is a significant advance in antifungal
susceptibility testing (14). In comparison, testing of
Candida isolates for susceptibility to amphotericin B has
lagged; standardized testing methods recommended by the National
Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards generate a narrow range of
amphotericin B MICs, limiting the ability to identify isolates likely
to cause therapeutic failure (8, 13). Recently, a simple
testing method employing E-test strips identified two isolates known to
be resistant to amphotericin B in animal models of candidiasis
(15, 16), suggesting that the E test might be able to
identify amphotericin B-resistant isolates recovered from humans. To
address this possibility, we used the E test to determine
amphotericin B MICs for 99 Candida bloodstream isolates
recovered from patients enrolled in a multicenter prospective
study of candidemia (8). MICs were correlated with the
ability of amphotericin B to eliminate Candida organisms
from patients' bloodstreams.
The Candida isolates were recovered from 99 candidemic
patients who received amphotericin B as monotherapy (median dose, 0.6 mg/kg/day) and from whom all intravenous catheters were removed prior
to enrollment. The isolates included were 52 of Candida albicans, 20 of C. glabrata, 14 of C. tropicalis, 9 of C. parapsilosis, 3 of C. lusitaniae, and 1 of C. krusei, each of which had
previously been tested for amphotericin B susceptibility by the
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards broth
macrodilution method (8, 9). For the E test, the
Candida inoculum density was standardized to a 0.5 McFarland
standard and 300 µl was dispensed onto the center of an
80-mm-diameter plate containing RPMI 1640 medium with
L-glutamine supplemented with 2% glucose and buffered to
pH 7.0 with 0.165 M morpholinepropanesulfonic acid (MOPS), with
Bacto Agar added at a final concentration of 1.5 g/100 ml. MICs were
interpreted as previously described (1). Thirty-three isolates were tested at least twice by the E test, and the MICs agreed
within a fourfold dilution. Therapeutic failure was defined as failure
of amphotericin B to clear Candida from the bloodstream on
the basis of previously reported criteria (8).
The E test yielded a wide distribution of amphotericin B MICs (Table
1). The broth macrodilution method, on
the other hand, had previously yielded a narrow distribution
of MICs, ranging from 0.06 to 1 µg/ml (8). The
amphotericin B MICs determined by the E test were higher for isolates
associated with therapeutic failure than the MICs for those associated
with therapeutic success. This finding was most pronounced at 48 h
(geometric mean MICs of 0.22 and 0.05 µg/ml, respectively;
P = 0.001), although the difference was also
significant at 24 h (geometric mean MICs of 0.10 and 0.03 µg/ml,
respectively; P = 0.01).
0066-4804/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Correlation between In Vitro Susceptibility Determined by E Test
and Response to Therapy with Amphotericin B: Results from a Multicenter
Prospective Study of Candidemia
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
0.38 µg/ml identified isolates likely
to be associated with therapeutic failure.
![]()
TEXT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
TABLE 1.
Distribution of amphotericin B MICs determined by the
E-test method
Based on the distribution of MICs at 24 and 48 h stratified by
response to therapy, breakpoint MICs capable of identifying amphotericin B-resistant isolates could be proposed. At 24 h, 46%
(15 of 33) of the isolates for which the MICs were
0.19 µg/ml were
associated with therapeutic failure, versus only 17% (11 of 66) of
those for which the MICs were <0.19 µg/ml (P = 0.005). The relative risk of therapeutic failure among patients
infected with isolates for which the MICs at 24 h were
0.19
µg/ml was 2.7-fold (95% confidence interval, 1.5 to 12) greater than
the risk of failure among patients infected with isolates for which the
MICs were <0.19 µg/ml. At 48 h, 56% (14 of 25) of the isolates for which the MICs were
0.38 µg/ml were associated with therapeutic failure, versus only 16% (12 of 74) of the isolates for which the MICs
were <0.38 µg/ml (P = 0.0001). The relative risk of
therapeutic failure among patients infected with isolates for which the
MICs at 48 h were
0.38 µg/ml was 3.5-fold (95% confidence
interval, 2.2 to 20.4) greater than the risk of failure among patients
infected with isolates for which the MICs were <0.38 µg/ml.
The E-test breakpoint MIC of
0.38 µg/ml had a sensitivity of 54%
(14 of 26), a specificity of 85%, and a positive predictive value of
56%. The sensitivity and specificity of these breakpoint MICs are
similar to those of the fluconazole breakpoint MIC recently proposed
(14). Such values are impressive, given the inherent difficulty of detecting amphotericin B resistance among isolates recovered from the heterogeneous population of candidemic
patients, whose therapeutic outcome depends upon myriad factors in
addition to the susceptibility of the infecting organism to
antifungal agents.
Although therapeutic failure of amphotericin B is well recognized in series of patients with candidemia, an association between such failure and amphotericin B resistance has been infrequently observed (2, 3, 5, 7, 10). The incidence of in vitro resistance among series of clinical isolates has generally been extremely low (13), leading some to suggest that susceptibility of Candida to amphotericin B is essentially universal (6) and that failure of therapy is primarily due to factors such as host immune status and underlying illness. Our results, however, argue that amphotericin B resistance does exist and contributes to at least some of the cases in which amphotericin B therapy fails. Our finding of a significant rate of amphotericin B resistance is consistent with an earlier report that found resistance among 7% of the Candida isolates recovered from oncology patients (2, 12). There are two possible reasons that these two studies identified a higher number of amphotericin B-resistant isolates than other studies. First, many of the isolates tested were recovered from patients who had received prior courses of amphotericin B or who were neutropenic, factors that likely predisposed to the emergence of resistance. Second, the agar-based methodologies of in vitro testing used in both studies might be more sensitive than broth-based methods of detecting amphotericin B resistance.
Earlier studies have investigated the E test as a method of testing Candida isolates for susceptibility to amphotericin B. Several have found E-test MICs to be comparable to those of the macrodilution method (4, 11). Our study corroborates these findings; when E-test MICs were rounded up to the next highest value that corresponded to a standard twofold dilution value used in the broth macrodilution method, the agreement within a fourfold dilution between these two methods was 96% (95 of 99).
In conclusion, we have demonstrated that the E test is a potentially useful method of identifying amphotericin B-resistant Candida isolates. If these results can be confirmed, the E test represents a significant advance in antifungal susceptibility testing. To facilitate the use of the E test in future studies of clinical yeast isolates and to permit comparison of results between such studies, the development of a standardized testing methodology is of the highest priority.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: University of Florida College of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, P.O. Box 100277, JHMHC, Gainesville, FL 32610. Phone: (352) 392-4058. Fax: (352) 392-6481. E-mail: nguyemt{at}medicine.ufl.edu.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | AB BIODISK. 1994. Etest technical guide 4b: antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. AB BIODISK, Piscataway, N.J. |
| 2. | Bodenhoff, J. 1968. Resistance studies of Candida albicans, with special reference to two patients subjected to prolonged antimycotic treatment. Odontol. Tidskr. 76:279-294[Medline]. |
| 3. | Dick, J. D., B. R. Rosengard, W. G. Merz, R. K. Stuart, G. M. Hutchins, and R. Saral. 1985. Fatal disseminated candidiasis due to amphotericin B-resistant Candida guilliermondii. Ann. Intern. Med. 102:67-68. |
| 4. | Espinel-Ingroff, A., M. Pfaller, M. E. Erwin, and R. N. Jones. 1996. Interlaboratory evaluation of Etest method for testing antifungal susceptibilities of pathogenic yeasts to five antifungal agents by using Casitone agar and solidified RPMI 1640 medium with 2% glucose. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:848-852[Abstract]. |
| 5. |
Fan-Havard, P.,
D. Capano,
S. M. Smith,
A. Mangia, and R. H. K. Eng.
1991.
Development of resistance in Candida isolates from patients receiving prolonged antifungal therapy.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
35:2302-2305 |
| 6. | Hamilton, J. M. T. 1974. Non-emergence of polyene-resistant yeasts: an hypothesis. Microbios 18A:91-95. |
| 7. |
Merz, W. G., and G. R. Sandford.
1979.
Isolation and characterization of a polyene-resistant variant of Candida tropicalis.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
9:677-680 |
| 8. | Nguyen, M. H., C. J. Clancy, V. L. Yu, Y. C. Yu, A. J. Morris, D. R. Snydman, D. A. Sutton, and M. G. Rinaldi. 1998. Do in vitro susceptibility data predict the microbiologic response to amphotericin B? Results of a prospective study of patients with Candida fungemia. J. Infect. Dis. 177:425-430[Medline]. |
| 9. | Nguyen, M. H., J. E. Peacock, A. J. Morris, A. C. Tanner, M. L. Nguyen, D. R. Snydman, M. M. Wagener, M. G. Rinaldi, and V. L. Yu. 1996. The changing face of candidemia: Emergence of the non-C. albicans species and antifungal resistance. Am. J. Med. 100:617-623[Medline]. |
| 10. |
Pappagianis, D.,
M. S. Collins,
R. Hector, and J. Remington.
1979.
Development of resistance to amphotericin B in Candida lusitaniae infecting a human.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
16:123-126 |
| 11. | Pfaller, M. A., S. A. Messer, A. Bolmström, F. C. Odds, and J. H. Rex. 1996. Multisite reproducibility of the Etest MIC method for antifungal susceptibility testing of yeast isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol. 34:1691-1693[Abstract]. |
| 12. | Powderly, W. G., G. S. Kobayashi, G. P. Herzig, and G. Medoff. 1988. Amphotericin B-resistant yeast infection in severely immunocompromised patients. Am. J. Med. 84:826-832[Medline]. |
| 13. | Rex, J. H., C. R. Cooper, W. G. Merz, J. N. Galgiani, and E. J. Anaissie. 1995. Detection of amphotericin B-resistant Candida isolates in a broth-based system. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 39:906-909[Abstract]. |
| 14. | Rex, J. H., M. A. Pfaller, J. N. Galgiani, M. S. Bartlett, A. Espinel-Ingroff, M. A. Ghannoum, M. Lancaster, F. C. Odds, M. G. Rinaldi, T. J. Walsh, and A. L. Barry. 1997. Development of interpretive breakpoints for antifungal susceptibility testing: conceptual framework and analysis of in vitro-in vivo correlation data for fluconazole, itraconazole, and Candida infections. Clin. Infect. Dis. 24:235-247[Medline]. |
| 15. | Van Eldere, J., L. Joosten, V. Verhaeghe, and I. Surmont. 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. 34:842-847[Abstract]. |
| 16. | Wanger, A., K. Mills, P. W. Nelson, and J. H. Rex. 1997. 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. 39:2520-2522[Abstract]. |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»