Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Susceptibility

Antifungal Susceptibility Survey of 2,000 Bloodstream Candida Isolates in the United States

Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner, John H. Rex, Peter G. Pappas, Richard J. Hamill, Robert A. Larsen, Harold W. Horowitz, William G. Powderly, Newton Hyslop, Carol A. Kauffman, John Cleary, Julie E. Mangino, Jeannette Lee
Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner
1University of Texas—Houston Medical School, Houston, Texas
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: luis.ostrosky-zeichner@uth.tmc.edu
John H. Rex
1University of Texas—Houston Medical School, Houston, Texas
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter G. Pappas
2University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard J. Hamill
3Baylor University, Houston, Texas
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert A. Larsen
4University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Harold W. Horowitz
5New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William G. Powderly
6Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Newton Hyslop
7Tulane Medical Center, New Orleans, Louisiana
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carol A. Kauffman
8University of Michigan and VA Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John Cleary
9University of Mississippi, Jackson, Mississippi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julie E. Mangino
10Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeannette Lee
2University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.10.3149-3154.2003
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Candida bloodstream isolates (n = 2,000) from two multicenter clinical trials carried out by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group between 1995 and 1999 were tested against amphotericin B (AMB), flucytosine (5FC), fluconazole (FLU), itraconazole (ITR), voriconazole (VOR), posaconazole (POS), caspofungin (CFG), micafungin (MFG), and anidulafungin (AFG) using the NCCLS M27-A2 microdilution method. All drugs were tested in the NCCLS-specified RPMI 1640 medium except for AMB, which was tested in antibiotic medium 3. A sample of isolates was also tested in RPMI 1640 supplemented to 2% glucose and by using the diluent polyethylene glycol (PEG) in lieu of dimethyl sulfoxide for those drugs insoluble in water. Glucose supplementation tended to elevate the MIC, whereas using PEG tended to decrease the MIC. Trailing growth occurred frequently with azoles. Isolates were generally susceptible to AMB, 5FC, and FLU. Rates of resistance to ITR approached 20%. Although no established interpretative breakpoints are available for the candins (CFG, MFG, and AFG) and the new azoles (VOR and POS), they all exhibited excellent antifungal activity, even for those strains resistant to the other aforementioned agents.

Candidemia is now the fourth-most-common bloodstream infection in the United States (11, 12, 23, 24). Antifungal susceptibility testing has become an important tool in the management of patients with invasive candidiasis, since both in vitro resistance and toxicity issues must be considered when selecting an antifungal agent (5, 10, 15, 30, 33). The NCCLS has developed the standardized and reproducible M27-A2 method for testing yeasts (18). This method is widely accepted and readily available in reference centers and specialized clinical laboratories. Although variations of this method have been proposed and intense investigation into the effects of different media and drug-solubilizing agents are ongoing, the basic method has proven to be a useful and reproducible standard (3, 4, 29, 36).

In this study, we examined the susceptibilities of 2,000 bloodstream Candida spp. isolates in the United States to currently licensed and newly available antifungal agents. Since small variations in the testing method have been shown to potentially increase the correlation of in vitro results with clinical response, three testing variations were studied: use of antibiotic medium 3 for testing amphotericin B (AMB), supplementation of the medium to 2% glucose (for all drugs), and use of polyethylene glycol (PEG) as a solvent (for drugs that are normally dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide). (This work was presented in part as abstracts 642 and 643 at the 39th Annual Meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, San Francisco, Calif., 2001.)

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Isolates.The Mycoses Study Group (MSG) of the National Institutes of Health carried out two clinical trials for patients with candidemia between 1995 and 1999 in the United States. MSG 33 was a study of fluconazole (FLU) plus AMB versus FLU alone for the treatment of candidemia (32), and MSG 34 was an epidemiological study (R. J. Hamill, P. G. Pappas, J. H. Rex, J. Y. Lee, H. Horowitz, C. A. Kauffman, N. Hyslop, R. A. Larsen, D. K. Stein, E. A. Graviss, C. J. Thomas, and the Mycosis Study Group, Abstr. 38th Annu. Meet. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am., abstr. 36, 2000). The 39 participating centers shipped 2,947 Candida isolates from 1,911 patients to the Laboratory of Mycology Research at the University of Texas—Houston Medical School. Isolates were stored in sterile water at room temperature, with a backup in glycerol frozen at −70°C. Since some of the received isolates represented serial collection of isolates from a single patient, subsequent work focused on the 2,000 isolates that represented the first isolate of each species from each patient. Identification was carried out using the API 20C AUX method (bioMerieux Vitek, Inc., Hazelwood, Mo.), with supplemental standard morphological and biochemical testing for problem isolates using cultures in cornmeal agar, germ tube testing, and the Murex identification system (Murex Diagnostics, Norcross, Ga.). Identification of an isolate as C. dubliniensis was made based on (i) demonstration of absence of growth at 42°C, (ii) formation of abundant chlamydospores on cornmeal-Tween 80 agar, (iii) absence of assimilation of xylose or α-methyl-d-glucoside, (iv) DNA banding patterns characteristic of a type isolate following digestion of genomic DNA, and (v) amplification of a C. dubliniensis-specific 288-bp fragment (39).

Quality control isolates were used in every testing batch and included ATCC 750 (C. tropicalis), 5W31 (C. lusitaniae), ATCC 20019 (C. parapsilosis), ATCC 6258 (C. krusei), ATCC 90028 (C. albicans), and CL524 (C. lusitaniae). MICs for these isolates were compared with published control limits (20, 35) and used to guide quality control testing and validation per NCCLS guidelines (18).

Drugs.AMB, 5-flucocytosine (5FC), FLU, itraconazole (ITR), voriconazole (VOR), posaconazole (POS), caspofungin (CFG), micafungin (MFG), and anidulafungin (AFG) were obtained from their manufacturers as research powders and frozen (−70°C) or refrigerated (3°C) as required. Drug stocks (100×) were made following the NCCLS M27-A2 recommendations (18). AMB, ITR, VOR, POS, and AFG were diluted in dimethyl sulfoxide. 5FC, FLU, CFG, and MFG were diluted in deionized water. Additional testing was also carried out for a limited number of randomly selected strains (∼15%) for ITR, VOR, and POS in PEG 400 (Sigma, St. Louis, Mo.). All drug stocks were frozen at −70°C until plate preparation. Testing ranges were 0.03 to 16 μg/ml for all drugs, except for 5FC and FLU, which were tested at 0.13 to 64 μg/ml.

Antifungal susceptibility testing.Antifungal susceptibility testing was carried out following the NCCLS M27-A2 microdilution method (18). Briefly, isolates were tested against all antifungal agents except AMB in RPMI 1640 (Sigma) buffered with 0.075 M 3-(N-morpholino)propanesulfonic acid, pH adjusted to 7.0. Supplemental testing was carried out on randomly selected (∼15%) isolates in 3-(N-morpholino)propanesulfonic acid-buffered RPMI 1640 supplemented with glucose to 20 g/liter. AMB was tested in antibiotic medium 3 (Becton Dickinson, Cockeysville, Md.) buffered with NAH2PO4 H20 plus NAHPO4, pH adjusted to 7.0. Serial dilutions (2×) of the antifungals in the appropriate medium were performed, and 100 μl of the dilutions was dispensed on microdilution plates (Corning, Corning, N.Y.). Plates were frozen at −70°C until used. Validation of plate stability and potency was performed, running quality control organisms with each batch of tests. After growth on Sabouraud dextrose agar overnight, the fungal inocula were prepared as per M27-A2 to yield a 2× inoculum (1 × 103 to 5 × 103 CFU/ml), of which 100 μl was dispensed in each well of the microdilution plate for testing, resulting in the appropriate concentration of medium, drug, and microorganisms in each well. The plates were incubated at 35°C. MICs were assessed visually and by a spectrophotometer reading at 570 nm after agitation at 24 and 48 h. MICs are defined as follows: MIC-0 corresponds to the lowest drug concentration producing an optically clear well or 95% reduction in optical density compared with medium only and MIC-2, the lowest drug concentration producing prominent growth reduction or a 50% reduction in optical density. This report focuses on spectrophotometer readings, which were occasionally overridden by visual readings in cases of erroneous or technically deficient spectrophotometric readings. Unless otherwise noted, the MIC is the MIC-0 for AMB and MIC-2 for all other drugs. The choice of MIC-0 and antibiotic medium 3 for AMB is based on the fact that these testing conditions appear to discriminate more-resistant isolates (36).

Statistical analysis.Descriptive statistics were performed using Microsoft Excel and Access functions. r2 for regression analysis between azole congeners was calculated using the log10 of the MICs with Epi Info 2002 software (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga.).

RESULTS

NCCLS-M27-A2-based data by drug.Table 1 shows the MICs at which 50% (MIC50) and 90% (MIC90) of the isolates tested were inhibited for each drug at 24 h (AMB) or 48 h (all other drugs) for the most commonly seen Candida spp. Table 2 shows MICs for the less frequent Candida spp. encountered in the survey. Table 3 shows the frequency of drug-resistant isolates identified in the survey for drugs that have established NCCLS interpretative breakpoints. While limited in numbers, the less commonly encountered Candida spp. showed uniform susceptibility to all of the drugs and are not specifically discussed in the paragraphs below.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1.

MIC50 and MIC90 summary for the most common Candida spp. with nine antifungal agentsa

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2.

MICs for infrequent Candida spp.a

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3.

Resistance rates for antifungals with published interpretive breakpointsa

AMB.Based on the medium and endpoints chosen, resistance to AMB appears to be rare. Using tentative breakpoints suggested in previous work (6, 34), 2 to 3% of C. parapsilosis and C. krusei isolates appeared to be resistant to this drug (Table 3). Higher MICs were not seen for C. lusitaniae, a species that is often, but not always, found to be resistant to AMB (16).

5FC.More than 95% of isolates of all species except C. krusei and C. tropicalis were susceptible to 5FC. Resistance to 5FC was noted for 12% of C. krusei isolates and 6% of C. tropicalis isolates.

FLU.Susceptibility to FLU was similar to that seen in other major surveillance surveys. C. krusei and C. glabrata showed the highest MICs. Overall resistance to FLU occurred in less than 10% of the tested strains. A separate analysis (data not shown) of FLU resistance by year failed to show an increase in resistance to FLU over the study years. Likewise, no regional variations in resistance were seen among the participating centers.

ITR.As with FLU, the susceptibility patterns of ITR were concordant with prior work. C. glabrata and C. krusei showed high MICs. Complete resistance was seen in 18% of isolates and thus was overall more common than for FLU.

POS.No interpretive breakpoints have been established for this compound. Most isolates had low MICs (0.03 to 0.13 μg/ml), with higher MICs noted for C. glabrata and C. krusei. The MIC90 for C. tropicalis was increased due to the trailing phenomenon (see below).

VOR.No interpretive breakpoints have been established. MICs were mostly in the range of 0.03 to 0.25 μg/ml. Higher MICs were noted for C. krusei and C. glabrata. The MIC90 for C. tropicalis was elevated due to trailing (see below).

AFG.There are no established interpretive breakpoints for AFG. Most isolates exhibited MICs of 0.03 to 0.06 μg/ml, but C. parapsilosis strains showed MICs of 1 to 4 μg/ml.

CFG.There are no established interpretive breakpoints for caspofungin. Most isolates showed MICs of 0.5 to 2 μg/ml, with C. parapsilosis isolates tending to concentrate on the higher end. Paradoxical fungal growth at the highest drug concentrations, the so-called “Eagle” phenomenon, of unknown (but unlikely) in vivo significance (8, 40, 41) and slight trailing were occasionally observed when testing isolates with this drug.

MFG.As with the other candins, interpretive breakpoints are unknown, but most isolates exhibited MICs in the range of 0.03 to 0.06 μg/ml, except for C. parapsilosis, which had MICs of 0.5 to 4 μg/ml. C. krusei and C. lusitaniae also tended to have slightly higher MICs.

Cross-resistance.Cross-resistance among the azoles, particularly for pairs of congeners (FLU-VOR and ITR-POS), has been a concern (22, 43, 44). Table 4 shows summaries for the two combinations. As seen in Table 4, VOR MICs generally correlated with FLU MICs, although some dispersion was seen (r2 = 0.48). This correlation was much better for ITR and POS (r2 = 0.65) (Table 4). The ultimate significance of these relationships remains to be determined.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 4.

Cross-distribution of azole congener MICsa

Variations by testing media and drug solubilizing agent.Table 5 shows MIC variations by testing medium and drug solubilizing agent when compared to standard RPMI and recommended solvents for 344 isolates. In general, adding more glucose to the medium tended to increase MICs of AFG and CFG and decrease the MICs of FLU and VOR while it increased those of ITR. Using PEG as a solvent decreased MICs of azoles by one to two dilutions for ∼30% of isolates, whether glucose content was increased or not.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 5.

MIC variations by differences in test medium and solvent when compared to RPMI and standard solvent for 344 Candida spp. isolatesa

The trailing phenomenon.The trailing phenomenon is most often encountered with azoles and is characterized by incomplete inhibition of growth (14, 31, 42). Severe trailing can be identified by complete or partial growth inhibition at 24 h and a partial growth inhibition at 48 h, with an elevated MIC. The significance of this phenomenon and its impact on resistance have been studied and do not appear to correlate with clinical success or failure. Rather, trailing seems to be an artifact of the method (2, 14, 42). This particularly applies to C. tropicalis, which has a high frequency of trailing yet appears to be a consistently azole-susceptible species. In contrast, C. glabrata and C. krusei also show trailing, but they are truly known to be less susceptible or resistant to azoles, thus adding to the evidence that this phenomenon has no in vivo or clinical correlation. The true nature, ramifications, and mechanisms of this phenomenon are still under intense scrutiny. For this study, we arbitrarily defined trailing growth as an eightfold increase in MIC between 24- and 48-h results for any isolate. Table 6 shows the frequency of trailing for different drugs and Candida spp. Trailing was a particular issue for C. krusei with 5FC, for all species except C. parapsilosis in the presence of azoles, and for C. parapsilosis when examining candins.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 6.

Frequency of the trailing phenomenon by drug and Candida spp.a

DISCUSSION

We present antifungal susceptibility data for a large survey of Candida spp. isolates causing bloodstream infections in the United States between 1995 and 1999. Our results confirm data from other surveys (21, 25, 27) and comprehensively present data on currently available and/or new antifungal agents.

While species-specific variations and occasional resistance were encountered, we can generally state that Candida spp. were susceptible to the traditional standards of treatment for primary infection: AMB and FLU. We found relatively low levels of FLU resistance and no geographic or temporal variations, as opposed to the findings previously described by Pfaller et al. (26). Resistance to ITR was found in nearly 20% of strains, which is a proportion compatible with previously published reports, and had species-specific trends. As shown in several earlier papers, resistance to older azoles is most commonly demonstrated for C. krusei and C. glabrata (2, 3, 22-24, 37). The new azoles (POS and VOR) have encouraging and potent antifungal activity against all Candida spp. including C. glabrata and C. krusei. Early in vivo and clinical experiences against infections caused by these organisms are encouraging as well (1, 9, 19, 27, 38).

The candins, a new class of antifungal agent, seem to have excellent in vitro activity against these organisms. It might be important to note here that the interpretation of MICs for these drugs is still a matter of some debate. Of note are the relatively high MICs that were seen for C. parapsilosis. While these MICs are comparatively higher than those for the other species, there are no in vitro or in vivo data to suggest that this represents resistance, and the achievable blood concentrations of candins at the currently recommended doses generally equal or slightly exceed these MICs (13). In fact, a recent study of treatment of candidiasis with CFG versus AMB failed to show significant variation in response rates by species (17). The present survey also presents susceptibility data for less common Candida spp. While the numbers are limited, generally good activity for most of the drugs was shown.

This survey also provides information on the performance and reliability of the NCCLS M27-A2 method and its variations. Adding glucose to the medium tended to increase candin and ITR MICs and decrease FLU MICs. Adding PEG as a solvent tended to decrease MICs of ITR, POS, and VOR, perhaps due to better solubility and delivery of the drug. Nevertheless, the vast majority of MICs consistently remained within two dilutions of the MIC obtained by the standard NCCLS M27-A2 method.

The frequencies of the trailing phenomenon are consistent with what has been previously reported (2). Our definition was strict and very sensitive. It is also important to consider that trailing isolates were not excluded from the resistance analysis; thus, the true frequency of resistance may be slightly overestimated. The nature of the trailing phenomenon is unknown, as is its contribution to the perception of resistance in vitro and the ultimate possibility of in vivo resistance translation (14, 31, 33, 36, 42).

Cross-resistance between the old and newer azoles deserves further exploration. This phenomenon as been previously considered (28), and this study showed a proportional increase of FLU-VOR and ITR-POS MICs, with r2 values of 0.48 and 0.65, respectively. While the MICs of the newer azole agents are lower than achievable concentrations, the clinical significance of these observations remains to be determined. Early experience shows good in vivo and clinical activity of these two new compounds against azole-resistant strains, classically azole-resistant species like C. krusei, and species with dose-dependent susceptibility like C. glabrata (7; L. Ostrosky-Zeichner, A. M. L. Oude Lashof, B. J. Kullber, and J. H. Rex, Abstr. 40th Ann. Meet. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am., Abstr. 352, 2002).

While correlation with clinical outcomes is still needed to validate the method for new drugs and establish interpretive breakpoints, this study provides evidence of the reproducibility and reliability of the NCCLS M27-A2 method and MIC trends and patterns for these drugs.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

L.O.-Z., J.H.R., P.G.P., R.J.H., R.A.L., H.W.H., W.G.P., N.H., C.A.K., J.C., J.E.M., and J.L. are members of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group Candidiasis Subproject. Other study group sites and participants are as follows: David M. Bamberger, University of Missouri, Kansas City; Robert W. Bradsher, Jr., University of Arkansas, Little Rock; Corstiaan Brass, Buffalo Medical Group, Buffalo, N.Y.; Antonino Catanzaro, University of California San Diego, San Diego; Stanley Chapman, University of Mississippi, Jackson; David Cohen, Medical Center Delaware, Newark; Lawrence Cone, Eisenhower Medical Center, Rancho Mirage, Calif.; Larry Danzinger, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago; John Edwards, University of California Los Angeles Harbor, Torrance; David Ennis, Baptist Montclair Medical Center, Birmingham, Ala.; Mitchell Goldman, Indiana University, Indianapolis; Jesse L. Goodman, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis; Ron Greenfield, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City; Kelly Henning, Thomas Jefferson Hospital, Philadelphia, Pa.; Eileen Hilton, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Newhyde Park, N.Y.; James Horton, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, N.C.; Edward Johnson, St. Michael's Medical Center, Newark, N.J.; Virgina Kan, VA Medical Center, Washington, D.C.; A. W. Karchmer, Deaconess Hospital, Boston, Mass.; Daniel Kett, VA Medical Center Miami, Miami, Fla.; Mathew Levison, Alleghany University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pa.; John Lutz, North Palm Internal Medicine, Fresno, Calif.; David S. McKinsey, Antibiotic Research Association Inc., Kansas City, Mo.; Gregory Melcher, Lackland Air Force Base, San Antonio, Tex.; Steven A. Norris, Community Hospital, Indianapolis, Ind.; Michael Perry, The Stamford Hospital, Stamford, Calif.; Annette Reboli, Cooper Hospital, Camden, N.J.; Robert Rubin, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Michael Scheld, University of Virginia, Charlottesville; Mindy Schuster, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; George Sebastian, Cancer and Blood Institute, Rancho Mirage, Calif.; Bryan Simmons, Methodist Hospital of Memphis, Memphis, Tenn.; Jack Sobel, Wayne State University, Detroit, Mich.; David K. Stein, Jacobi Medical Center, Bronx, N.Y.; John Stern, Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia; David Stevens, Santa Clara Medical Center, San Jose, Calif.; Alan Sugar, Boston University Hospital, Boston, Mass.; Ron Washburn, Bowman-Gray School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, N.C.; and Mark Zervos, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Mich.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 3 June 2003.
    • Returned for modification 29 June 2003.
    • Accepted 3 July 2003.
  • Copyright © 2003 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Ally, R., D. Schurmann, W. Kreisel, G. Carosi, K. Aguirrebengoa, B. Dupont, M. Hodges, P. Troke, and A. J. Romero. 2001. A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter trial of voriconazole and fluconazole in the treatment of esophageal candidiasis in immunocompromised patients. Clin. Infect. Dis.33:1447-1454.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. 2.↵
    Arthington-Skaggs, B. A., W. Lee-Yang, M. A. Ciblak, J. P. Frade, M. E. Brandt, R. A. Hajjeh, L. H. Harrison, A. N. Sofair, and D. W. Warnock. 2002. Comparison of visual and spectrophotometric methods of broth microdilution MIC end point determination and evaluation of a sterol quantitation method for in vitro susceptibility testing of fluconazole and itraconazole against trailing and nontrailing Candida isolates. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.46:2477-2481.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    Cuenca-Estrella, M., and J. L. Rodriguez-Tudela. 2001. Present status of the detection of antifungal resistance: the perspective from both sides of the ocean. Clin. Microbiol. Infect.7(Suppl. 2):46-53.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    Espinel-Ingroff, A., F. Barchiesi, K. C. Hazen, J. V. Martinez-Suarez, and G. Scalise. 1998. Standardization of antifungal susceptibility testing and clinical relevance. Med. Mycol.36(Suppl. 1):68-78.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    Ghannoum, M. A. 1996. Is antifungal susceptibility testing useful in guiding fluconazole therapy? Clin. Infect. Dis.22(Suppl. 2):S161-S165.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    Ghannoum, M. A. 1997. Susceptibility testing of fungi and correlation with clinical outcome. J. Chemother.9(Suppl. 1):19-24.
    OpenUrl
  7. 7.↵
    Ghannoum, M. A., I. Okogbule-Wonodi, N. Bhat, and H. Sanati. 1999. Antifungal activity of voriconazole (UK-109, 496), fluconazole and amphotericin B against hematogenous Candida krusei infection in neutropenic guinea pig model. J. Chemother.11:34-39.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    Goldstein, K., and V. T. Rosdahl. 1981. High concentration of ampicillin and the Eagle effect among gram-negative rods. Chemotherapy27:313-317.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Hoffman, H. L., E. J. Ernst, and M. E. Klepser. 2000. Novel triazole antifungal agents. Expert Opin. Investig. Drugs9:593-605.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    Hoffman, H. L., and M. A. Pfaller. 2001. In vitro antifungal susceptibility testing. Pharmacotherapy21:111S-123S.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    Jarvis, W. R. 1995. Epidemiology of nosocomial fungal infections, with emphasis on Candida species. Clin. Infect. Dis.20:1526-1530.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. 12.↵
    Kullberg, B. J., and A. M. Oude Lashof. 2002. Epidemiology of opportunistic invasive mycoses. Eur. J. Med. Res.7:183-191.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  13. 13.↵
    Kurtz, M. B., and J. H. Rex. 2001. Glucan synthase inhibitors as antifungal agents. Adv. Protein Chem.56:463-475.
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.↵
    Marr, K. A., T. R. Rustad, J. H. Rex, and T. C. White. 1999. The trailing end point phenotype in antifungal susceptibility testing is pH dependent. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.43:1383-1386.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    Martins, M. D., and J. H. Rex. 1996. Resistance to antifungal agents in the critical care setting: problems and perspectives. N. Horiz.4:338-344.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    McClenny, N. B., H. H. Fei, E. J. Baron, A. C. Gales, A. Houston, R. J. Hollis, and M. A. Pfaller. 2002. Change in colony morphology of Candida lusitaniae in association with development of amphotericin B resistance. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.46:1325-1328.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    Mora-Duarte, J., R. Betts, C. Rotstein, A. L. Colombo, L. Thompson-Moya, J. Smietana, R. Lupinacci, C. Sable, N. Kartsonis, and J. Perfect. 2002. Comparison of caspofungin and amphotericin B for invasive candidiasis. N. Engl. J. Med.347:2020-2029.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. 18.↵
    National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. 2002. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts; approved standard NCCLS document M27-A2. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Wayne, Pa.
  19. 19.↵
    Patterson, T. F. 1999. Role of newer azoles in surgical patients. J. Chemother.11:504-512.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  20. 20.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., M. Bale, B. Buschelman, M. Lancaster, A. Espinel-Ingroff, J. H. Rex, M. G. Rinaldi, C. R. Cooper, and M. R. McGinnis. 1995. Quality control guidelines for National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards recommended broth macrodilution testing of amphotericin B, fluconazole, and flucytosine. J. Clin. Microbiol.33:1104-1107.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., D. J. Diekema, S. A. Messer, R. J. Hollis, and R. N. Jones. 2003. In vitro activities of caspofungin compared with those of fluconazole and itraconazole against 3,959 clinical isolates of Candida spp., including 157 fluconazole-resistant isolates. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.47:1068-1071.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., R. N. Jones, G. V. Doern, A. C. Fluit, J. Verhoef, H. S. Sader, S. A. Messer, A. Houston, S. Coffman, R. J. Hollis, et al. 1999. International surveillance of blood stream infections due to Candida species in the European SENTRY Program: species distribution and antifungal susceptibility including the investigational triazole and echinocandin agents. SENTRY Participant Group (Europe). Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.35:19-25.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. 23.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., R. N. Jones, G. V. Doern, H. S. Sader, R. J. Hollis, S. A. Messer, et al. 1998. International surveillance of bloodstream infections due to Candida species: frequency of occurrence and antifungal susceptibilities of isolates collected in 1997 in the United States, Canada, and South America for the SENTRY Program.
  24. 24.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., R. N. Jones, G. V. Doern, H. S. Sader, S. A. Messer, A. Houston, S. Coffman, and R. J. Hollis. 2000. Bloodstream infections due to Candida species: SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program in North America and Latin America, 1997-1998. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.44:747-751.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., S. A. Messer, L. Boyken, H. Huynh, R. J. Hollis, and D. J. Diekema. 2002. In vitro activities of 5-fluorocytosine against 8,803 clinical isolates of Candida spp.: global assessment of primary resistance using National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards susceptibility testing methods. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.46:3518-3521.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., S. A. Messer, L. Boyken, S. Tendolkar, R. J. Hollis, and D. J. Diekema. 2003. Variation in susceptibility of bloodstream isolates of Candida glabrata to fluconazole according to patient age and geographic location. J. Clin. Microbiol.41:2176-2179.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., S. A. Messer, R. J. Hollis, and R. N. Jones. 2001. In vitro activities of posaconazole (Sch 56592) compared with those of itraconazole and fluconazole against 3,685 clinical isolates of Candida spp. and Cryptococcus neoformans. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.45:2862-2864.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., S. A. Messer, R. J. Hollis, R. N. Jones, and D. J. Diekema. 2002. In vitro activities of ravuconazole and voriconazole compared with those of four approved systemic antifungal agents against 6,970 clinical isolates of Candida spp. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.46:1723-1727.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., J. H. Rex, and M. G. Rinaldi. 1997. Antifungal susceptibility testing: technical advances and potential clinical applications. Clin. Infect. Dis.24:776-784.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. 30.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., and W. L. Yu. 2001. Antifungal susceptibility testing. New technology and clinical applications. Infect. Dis. Clin. N. Am.15:1227-1261.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    Revankar, S. G., W. R. Kirkpatrick, R. K. McAtee, A. W. Fothergill, S. W. Redding, M. G. Rinaldi, and T. F. Patterson. 1998. Interpretation of trailing endpoints in antifungal susceptibility testing by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards method. J. Clin. Microbiol.36:153-156.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    Rex, J. H., P. G. Pappas, A. W. Karchmer, J. Sobel, J. E. Edwards, S. Hadley, C. Brass, J. A. Vazquez, S. W. Chapman, H. W. Horowitz, M. Zervos, D. McKinsey, J. Lee, T. Babinchak, R. W. Bradsher, J. D. Cleary, D. M. Cohen, L. Danziger, M. Goldman, J. Goodman, E. Hilton, N. E. Hyslop, D. H. Kett, J. Lutz, R. H. Rubin, W. M. Scheld, M. Schuster, B. Simmons, D. K. Stein, R. G. Washburn, L. Mautner, T. C. Chu, H. Panzer, R. B. Rosenstein, and J. Booth. 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.36:1221-1228.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  33. 33.↵
    Rex, J. H., and M. A. Pfaller. 2002. Has antifungal susceptibility testing come of age? Clin. Infect. Dis.35:982-989.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. 34.↵
    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, A. L. Barry, et al. 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.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. 35.↵
    Rex, J. H., M. A. Pfaller, M. Lancaster, F. C. Odds, A. Bolmstrom, and M. G. Rinaldi. 1996. Quality control guidelines for National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards-recommended broth macrodilution testing of ketoconazole and itraconazole. J. Clin. Microbiol.34:816-817.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    Rex, J. H., M. A. Pfaller, T. J. Walsh, V. Chaturvedi, A. Espinel-Ingroff, M. A. Ghannoum, L. L. Gosey, F. C. Odds, M. G. Rinaldi, D. J. Sheehan, and D. W. Warnock. 2001. Antifungal susceptibility testing: practical aspects and current challenges. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.14:643-658.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    Rex, J. H., T. J. Walsh, J. D. Sobel, S. G. Filler, P. G. Pappas, W. E. Dismukes, J. E. Edwards, et al. 2000. Practice guidelines for the treatment of candidiasis. Clin. Infect. Dis.30:662-678.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  38. 38.↵
    Ruhnke, M., A. Schmidt-Westhausen, and M. Trautmann. 1997. In vitro activities of voriconazole (UK-109, 496) against fluconazole-susceptible and -resistant Candida albicans isolates from oral cavities of patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.41:575-577.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    Sancak, B., J. H. Rex, V. Paetznick, E. Chen, and J. Rodriguez. 2003. Evaluation of method for identification of Candida dubliniensis bloodstream isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol.41:489-491.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    Shah, P. M. 1982. Paradoxical effect of antibiotics. I. The ′Eagle effect.' J. Antimicrob. Chemother.10:259-260.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    St-Germain, G. 1990. Effects of pentamidine alone and in combination with ketoconazole or itraconazole on the growth of Candida albicans. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.34:2304-2306.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. 42.↵
    St-Germain, G. 2001. Impact of endpoint definition on the outcome of antifungal susceptibility tests with Candida species: 24- versus 48-h incubation and 50 versus 80% reduction in growth. Mycoses44:37-45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    Vazquez, J. A., G. Peng, J. D. Sobel, L. Steele-Moore, P. Schuman, W. Holloway, and J. D. Neaton. 2001. Evolution of antifungal susceptibility among Candida species isolates recovered from human immunodeficiency virus-infected women receiving fluconazole prophylaxis. Clin. Infect. Dis.33:1069-1075.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  44. 44.↵
    White, T. C., S. Holleman, F. Dy, L. F. Mirels, and D. A. Stevens. 2002. Resistance mechanisms in clinical isolates of Candida albicans. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.46:1704-1713.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Antifungal Susceptibility Survey of 2,000 Bloodstream Candida Isolates in the United States
Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner, John H. Rex, Peter G. Pappas, Richard J. Hamill, Robert A. Larsen, Harold W. Horowitz, William G. Powderly, Newton Hyslop, Carol A. Kauffman, John Cleary, Julie E. Mangino, Jeannette Lee
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Sep 2003, 47 (10) 3149-3154; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.10.3149-3154.2003

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Antifungal Susceptibility Survey of 2,000 Bloodstream Candida Isolates in the United States
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Antifungal Susceptibility Survey of 2,000 Bloodstream Candida Isolates in the United States
Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner, John H. Rex, Peter G. Pappas, Richard J. Hamill, Robert A. Larsen, Harold W. Horowitz, William G. Powderly, Newton Hyslop, Carol A. Kauffman, John Cleary, Julie E. Mangino, Jeannette Lee
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Sep 2003, 47 (10) 3149-3154; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.10.3149-3154.2003
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

antifungal agents
Candida
candidiasis

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AAC
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • AAC Podcast
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AACJournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0066-4804; Online ISSN: 1098-6596