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

In Vitro Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern of Non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium Isolates in Ontario, Canada, from 2011 to 2016

Alefiya Neemuchwala, Deidre Soares, Vithusha Ravirajan, Alex Marchand-Austin, Julianne V. Kus, Samir N. Patel
Alefiya Neemuchwala
aPublic Health Ontario Laboratory, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Deidre Soares
aPublic Health Ontario Laboratory, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vithusha Ravirajan
aPublic Health Ontario Laboratory, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alex Marchand-Austin
aPublic Health Ontario Laboratory, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Alex Marchand-Austin
Julianne V. Kus
aPublic Health Ontario Laboratory, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
bDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Samir N. Patel
aPublic Health Ontario Laboratory, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
bDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01776-17
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium-associated disease has been increasingly observed and often presents a conundrum to the treating physician. Analysis of antibiotic susceptibility testing data for 1,970 clinical Corynebacterium isolates received between 2011 and 2016 revealed that empirical drug treatment options are limited to vancomycin and linezolid. Corynebacterium striatum was the most frequently observed species during this study period, along with C. amycolatum and C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum. Low levels of susceptibility to penicillin (14.5%), erythromycin (15.1%), and clindamycin (8.7%) were observed for non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium species, while 3.0% of isolates were not susceptible to daptomycin. Similarly, 26.9% and 38.1% of Corynebacterium isolates were susceptible to ciprofloxacin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, respectively. Our data show much lower susceptibility to penicillin than previously reported in the literature and an increasing number of isolates resistant to daptomycin, highlighting the need for continued antibiotic surveillance studies for appropriate patient management and treatment success.

INTRODUCTION

Corynebacterium species are Gram-positive catalase-positive rod-shaped bacteria often referred to as “diphtheroids.” Effective vaccination programs have resulted in a decrease in Corynebacterium diphtheriae-related infection cases in the last 50 years. However, in the past 2 decades, there has been a rise in disease due to non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium species, with a variety of infections reported, including skin and soft tissue infections, prosthetic joint infections, bacteremia, respiratory infections, pneumonia, meningitis, surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, peritonitis, and endocarditis (1–3). Of additional concern, some of the non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium species have been shown to be resistant to multiple classes of antibiotics, thus potentially limiting effective empirical treatment (1–4).

This study presents the in vitro susceptibility profiles of 1,970 isolates of non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium species to 19 different antibiotics that were tested at the Public Health Ontario Laboratory (PHOL; Ontario, Canada) from 2011 to 2016.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This study evaluated the antibiotic susceptibility test results of 1,970 isolates of nondiphtherial corynebacteria that were submitted to the PHOL from 2011 to 2016. Within this group, a total of 42 different Corynebacterium species were represented, as well as 24 isolates that could only be identified to the genus level and were reported as Corynebacterium species. The majority of the isolates belonged to C. striatum (47%), followed by C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum (10.96%), C. amycolatum (9.64%), C. afermentans subsp. afermentans (5%), C. minutissimum (4%), C. jeikeium (4%), C. coyleae (3%), and C. urealyticum (3%). Other Corynebacterium species tested during this time period included C. resistens, Corynebacterium CDC group G, C. accolens, C. glucuronolyticum, and others (see Table S1 in the supplemental material). In our study, C. striatum was the most commonly submitted species for identification and susceptibility testing, whereas other reports have noted C. amycolatum as the most prevalent nondiphtherial corynebacteria reported (1, 5). Despite being the most commonly submitted species, there was no significant difference in the proportions of C. striatum isolates submitted over the years (P = 0.45) (data not shown). Additionally, no significant trend was observed for the top five commonly encountered corynebacterial species in terms of the proportion submitted for identification and susceptibility testing over time.

Isolates were predominantly cultured from blood (n = 479 [24.3%]), followed by sputum (n = 382 [19.4%]) (Table S2). A number of isolates were also recovered from bone (n = 97 [4.9%]) and synovial fluid (n = 41 [2.0%]) (Table S2).

Between 2011 and 2016, 28 different corynebacterial species were isolated and identified from blood, with C. striatum as the most frequent (26.2%), followed by C. afermentans (19.8%), C. coyleae (9.8%), and C. minutissimum (7.7%). Blood culture was the most common source for C. mucifaciens (92% [n = 13]), C. afermentans (83% [n = 89]), and C. coyleae (81% [n = 58]). The most frequently recovered species from sputum specimens were C. striatum (63%) and C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum (35%). For C. striatum, the chief specimen sources were sputum (26%), blood (14%), tissue (11%), bone (9%), wounds (6%), bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and/or pleural fluid (3%), and peritoneal fluid (2%).

Of the 1,970 isolates submitted for susceptibility testing, 1,010 isolates were recovered from male patients (51.3%), 739 isolates were from female patients (37.5%), and 221 specimens were from a patient of unknown sex. While 15 (0.7%) specimens were recovered from patients less than 1 year of age, 24 (1.2%) specimens were from patients age 1 to 17 years, 844 (42.8%) specimens were from patients age 18 to 64 years, and 1,070 (54.3%) specimens were from patients age 65 or older; the remaining 17 isolates did not have the patient's age on the submission form.

The susceptibility profiles of the 1,970 nondiphtherial corynebacterial isolates showed that they were universally susceptible to vancomycin and linezolid (Table 1; see also Data Set S1 in the supplemental material). The majority of isolates (>90%) were susceptible to rifampin, gentamicin, and quinupristin-dalfopristin. Interestingly, 45 out of the 1,959 isolates tested for daptomycin had an MIC of ≥2 mg/liter, which is considered “nonsusceptible” based on the current CLSI interpretative criteria (6). Overall as a group, the nondiphtherial corynebacteria in this study demonstrated low rates of susceptibility to penicillin (14.5%), erythromycin (15.12%), clindamycin (8.7%), and ciprofloxacin (26.9%). Based on the EUCAST clinical breakpoint (30), 27.7% of nondiphtherial corynebacterial isolates were susceptible to moxifloxacin.

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

In vitro susceptibilities of the Corynebacterium isolates received at the PHOL from 2011 to 2016

Among the nondiphtherial corynebacteria in this study, C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum isolates showed the highest susceptibility to penicillin (95.8%), whereas C. amycolatum (10.5%), C. afermentans subsp. afermentans (1.1%), C. minutissimum (3.9%), C. coyleae (1.7%), C. urealyticum (3.8%), and C. aurimucosum (5.9%) isolates were the least susceptible to penicillin (Table 1). Only a single isolate of C. striatum (1/931 isolates) and none of the C. jeikeium (n = 76) or C. resistens (n = 19) isolates were susceptible to penicillin. Susceptibility to penicillin and other beta-lactams has reduced in the last 2 decades among certain nondiphtherial corynebacteria, including C. striatum (7–10). Consistent with our findings, a study from Japan showed that none of the C. striatum (n = 22) isolates recovered from blood specimens were susceptible to penicillin (9). However, a recent Canadian study (4) reported the susceptibility rate of penicillin for the Corynebacterium genus to be 77%, which is much higher than the susceptibility rate (14.5%) found in our study. The difference in the susceptibility rate may be partially explained because Bernard et al. (4) used CLSI 2010 interpretative criterion (susceptibility [S], ≤1 mg/liter) versus the revised CLSI 2015 interpretative criterion (S ≤ 0.12 mg/liter) for penicillin that was used in our study. Our study also did not include any C. diphtheriae isolates, which constituted 35% of the 595 isolates tested in the Bernard et al. study. Another explanation could be differences in geographical distribution of various clones of nondiphtherial corynebacteria. For example, our data demonstrate that C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum was mostly susceptible to beta-lactams (95%); however, this differs from a report from Brazil in which high rates of penicillin resistance were observed (11). In our study, the MIC50 and MIC90 for ampicillin among C. striatum were 4 mg/liter and >8 mg/liter, respectively. On the other hand, Soriano et al. (8) reported the MIC50 and MIC90 values of ampicillin for C. striatum to be 0.5 mg/liter and 2 mg/liter, respectively, in a study conducted on isolates collected in Spain. Similarly, Martínez-Martínez et al. (12) reported the MIC50 and MIC90 of ampicillin for C. striatum (n = 86) of 1 mg/liter and 2 mg/liter, respectively, on isolates collected in Spain.

Susceptibility to erythromycin varied among Corynebacterium spp., with none of the C. afermentans subsp. afermentans isolates displaying susceptibility (n = 89), while only 1.9% of C. urealyticum and 21.2% of C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum isolates were found to be susceptible (Table 1). Similarly, clindamycin susceptibility ranged from 0% to 20.8% among nondiphtherial corynebacteria. Resistance to erythromycin among nondiphtherial corynebacteria has been reported previously (1, 4, 7, 8) and is mainly attributed to the presence of the ermX gene (3). The erythromycin and clindamycin susceptibilities in this study were lower than those recently reported by Bernard et al. (4).

Among non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium species in this study, 26.9% of isolates were susceptible to ciprofloxacin. Ciprofloxacin had the lowest activity against C. striatum (4.6%) and C. urealyticum (3.8%) and the highest activity against C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum (Table 1). The activities of moxifloxacin and levofloxacin were similar to that of ciprofloxacin for all nondiphtherial corynebacteria. C. urealyticum has been known to cause acute and chronic urinary tract infections (UTIs) and may lead to bacteremia. Consistent with our findings, a previous study had reported that 96.1% of C. urealyticum isolates were found to be nonsusceptible to ciprofloxacin (13). Fluoroquinolones are extensively used to treat UTIs (14); however, isolates of C. urealyticum in this study displayed resistance to several major drug classes, including ciprofloxacin. Ciprofloxacin resistance has also been reported among C. glucuronolyticum (15). In our study, 73% of the C. glucuronolyticum (n = 15) isolates were susceptible to ciprofloxacin.

The recent study by Bernard et al. (4) reported the rates of susceptibility to ciprofloxacin, tetracycline, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole to be 69.9%, 87.1%, and 73.1%, respectively, for isolates identified as Corynebacterium since the 1990s (4). However, in our study, the susceptibilities among all the Corynebacterium isolates are lower for ciprofloxacin, tetracycline, and trimethoprim, with susceptibility rates of 27.5%, 64%, and 38%, respectively. The differences in the percentage of susceptible isolates to ciprofloxacin seen here are in line with what has been observed in other recent studies by Hahn et al. (2) and Soriano et al. (16) and may due to differences in the number of isolates and, in particular, the years of collection.

Resistance to gentamicin has been reported previously in C. striatum and is associated with the presence of the aac(3)-XI gene encoding AAC(3)-XI, a new aminoglycoside 3-N-acetyltransferase (17). In our study, 92.8% of C. striatum isolates were found to be susceptible to gentamicin. Among all species of Corynebacterium, C. urealyticum (55.8%), C. jeikeium (81.2%), and Corynebacterium CDC group G (85.7%) showed the lowest susceptibility against gentamicin.

As stated earlier, 45 (3.0%) out of 1,959 Corynebacterium isolates tested for daptomycin showed an MIC of ≥2 mg/liter and are considered nonsusceptible isolates. Daptomycin has been increasingly suggested as an important therapeutic alternative for multidrug-resistant Corynebacterium species, including C. striatum and C. jeikeium (18). However, daptomycin-nonsusceptible isolates of C. striatum (n = 16), C. minutissimum (n = 5), C. jeikeium (n = 7), C. coyleae (n = 3), and a single isolate each of C. amycolatum, C. aurimucosum, Corynebacterium CDC group G, C. durum, C. imitans, C. pseudodiphtheriticum, C. singular, C. simulans, C. riegelii, C. resistens, and other Corynebacterium species were identified in this study. Daptomycin resistance has been previously described in C. jeikeium (19), as well as in patients with C. striatum infection receiving daptomycin treatment (20–23). Significantly, this study shows that daptomycin nonsusceptibility is not limited to C. striatum and C. jeikeium but is present in other nondiphtherial corynebacteria as well. Details regarding treatment were not available to us; therefore, it cannot be concluded if these isolates developed resistance while the patients had received treatment with daptomycin.

Tigecycline is another antibiotic that has been suggested in recent reports to be a therapeutic alternative for the treatment of complicated infections caused by these corynebacteria (24, 25). There are no breakpoints for resistance as defined by CLSI or EUCAST for tigecycline. The MIC50 and MIC90 were 0.12 mg/liter and 0.25 mg/liter, respectively, for all the corynebacteria in this study.

Antibiotic susceptibility testing data showed that 24 Corynebacterium species within the genus were completely susceptible to quinupristin-dalfopristin, and more than 90% of C. striatum, C. riegelii, C. accolens, C. jeikeium, C. minutissimum, C. imitans, C. aurimucosum, Corynebacterium CDC group G, and C. amycolatum isolates were susceptible. However, none of the C. glycinophilum (n = 3) isolates were susceptible to quinupristin-dalfopristin, and lower rates of susceptible isolates were found among C. coyleae (43%), C. kroppenstedtii (50%), C. afermentans (50%), C. auris (67%), and C. tuberculostearicum (67%).

C. minutissimum was previously considered to be susceptible to many different classes of antibiotics (1, 7, 9, 26), but most of the isolates in this study were resistant to more than four drug classes, including penicillin, erythromycin, gentamicin, and ciprofloxacin. Similarly, C. striatum was found to be highly multidrug resistant, with varied percentages of resistance to penicillin, erythromycin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, and daptomycin. Other frequently reported Corynebacterium species that were resistant to more than four drug classes included C. amycolatum, C. aurimucosum, C. afermentans, C. jeikeium, C. urealyticum, and C. coyleae. C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum isolates were mostly susceptible to beta-lactams (95%), vancomycin, linezolid, tetracycline, and gentamicin, though the susceptibility to macrolides and lincosamides was greatly reduced.

Our findings demonstrate that there are differences in antibiotic susceptibility among Corynebacterium species and that there is considerable antibiotic resistance in some species. Laboratories should identify clinically relevant Corynebacterium isolates to the species level, which may provide additional clues regarding antibiotic susceptibility. The increased use of matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) identification systems in clinical laboratories will greatly enhance front-line laboratory capacity and capability in identifying Corynebacterium organisms to the species level.

One of the limitations of our study is that it is not known whether Corynebacterium isolates recovered from specimens were truly the causative agents of the infection. The clinical relevance of nondiphtherial corynebacteria, including C. striatum, has been well documented since their identification (27), and Corynebacterium species, such as C. striatum, have been linked to multiple outbreaks in hospitals and nosocomial environments (28, 29). Therefore, although not often considered pathogenic, it is now clear that under the right circumstances, nondiphtherial corynebacteria can be the causative agents of infection. Therefore, in the absence of other organisms, the isolation of Corynebacterium spp. from sterile sites and/or from immunocompromised patients could be clinically relevant, and clinicians will need to decide whether to treat the infection based on clinical presentation as well as other findings. As nondiphtherial corynebacteria exhibit varied susceptibilities to many antibiotics, empirical treatment options are limited to vancomycin and linezolid. Multidrug resistance is on the rise among the nondiphtherial corynebacteria, with a decrease in susceptibility rates among species, such as C. striatum and C. minutissimum, which were previously reported to have low or no resistance (10, 26). As susceptibility varies among different nondiphtherial corynebacteria, and many commonly encountered Corynebacterium spp. are multidrug resistant, it is important to perform susceptibility testing particularly for those isolates that are recovered from sterile sites in order to manage patients appropriately. However, identification and susceptibility testing on these isolates can be time-consuming; therefore, regular surveillance studies may be useful in monitoring changes in trends of resistance and providing better empirical treatment options to patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In Ontario, hospital and community laboratories generally identify Corynebacterium to the genus level and refer isolates that are deemed clinically significant for species-level identification and susceptibility testing to the PHOL. All isolates of nondiphtherial corynebacteria recovered from specimens received by the PHOL between 2011 and 2016 were included in the study. Since the data were deidentified prior to analysis, it is not known what the proportion of isolates is from the same patients. From 2011 to 2014, bacterial identification was primarily done by biochemical tests (3, 5), and when a definitive identification could not be made, 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis was performed. From 2015 onward, MALDI-TOF MS (MALDI BioTyper; Bruker) was primarily used for identification combined with select biochemical tests and 16S rRNA sequencing for definitive identification when needed. Prior to the implementation of MALDI-TOF MS for the identification of Corynebacterium spp., biochemical testing and 16S rRNA gene sequencing were unable to reliably differentiate between C. pseudodiphtheriticum and C. propinquum. As a result, these isolates were reported as C. pseudodiphtheriticum/C. propinquum. When a definitive species-level identification could not be made, organisms were reported out as Corynebacterium species (not Corynebacterium diphtheriae).

Antibiotic susceptibility testing was performed using commercial broth microdilution Sensititre GPALL1F plates (Trek Diagnostic Systems, Thermo Fisher Scientific), and the susceptibility results for each antibiotic were interpreted as per the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines (6). MIC testing was performed for the following antibiotics: erythromycin (0.25 to 4 mg/liter), penicillin (0.06 to 8 mg/liter), vancomycin (0.25 to 32 mg/liter), gentamicin (2 to 16 mg/liter), daptomycin (0.5 to 4 mg/liter), ciprofloxacin (1 to 2 mg/liter), moxifloxacin (0.25 to 4 mg/liter), levofloxacin (0.25 to 4 mg/liter), ampicillin (0.125 to 8 mg/liter), oxacillin (0.25 to 4 mg/liter), nitrofurantoin (32 to 64 mg/liter), rifampin (0.5 to 4 mg/liter), tigecycline (0.03 to 0.5 mg/liter), clindamycin (0.5 to 2 mg/liter), tetracycline (2 to 16 mg/liter), chloramphenicol (2 to 16 mg/liter), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (0.5 to 4 mg/liter), quinupristin-dalfopristin (0.5 to 4 mg/liter), and linezolid (1 to 8 mg/liter). The CLSI does not have interpretative criteria for moxifloxacin, and therefore, clinical breakpoints for moxifloxacin were used from the European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) (30).

The number of isolates susceptible to each antibiotic was determined per year. The Cochran-Armitage test was used to measure trends in antimicrobial resistance over time, with a P value of less than 0.05 considered statistically significant. The Mann-Kendall test at a 5% significance level was used to analyze trends of Corynebacterium species submitted over time. Statistical analyses were done using R version 3.3.2.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank the staff of the reference identification and susceptibility sections of the PHOL for performing identification and susceptibility testing as part of routine clinical testing.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 24 August 2017.
    • Returned for modification 18 October 2017.
    • Accepted 4 January 2018.
    • Accepted manuscript posted online 16 January 2018.
  • Supplemental material for this article may be found at https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01776-17.

  • © Crown copyright 2018.

The government of Australia, Canada, or the UK (“the Crown”) owns the copyright interests of authors who are government employees. The Crown Copyright is not transferable.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Funke G,
    2. von Graevenitz A,
    3. Clarridge JE, III,
    4. Bernard KA
    . 1997. Clinical microbiology of coryneform bacteria. Clin Microbiol Rev 10:125–159.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Hahn WO,
    2. Werth BJ,
    3. Butler-Wu SM,
    4. Rakita RM
    . 2016. Multidrug-resistant Corynebacterium striatum associated with increased use of parenteral antimicrobial drugs. Emerg Infect Dis 22:1908–1914. doi:10.3201/eid2211.160141.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. 3.↵
    1. Bernard K
    . 2012. The genus Corynebacterium and other medically relevant coryneform-like bacteria. J Clin Microbiol 50:3152–3158. doi:10.1128/JCM.00796-12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Bernard K,
    2. Pacheco AL
    . 2015. In vitro activity of 22 antimicrobial agents against Corynebacterium and Microbacterium species referred to the Canadian National Microbiology Laboratory. Clin Microbiol Newsletter 37:187–198. doi:10.1016/j.clinmicnews.2015.11.003.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. 5.↵
    1. Funke G,
    2. Bernard K
    . 2011. Coryneform Gram-positive rods, p 413–42. In Versalovic J, Caroll KC, Funke G, Jorgensen JH, Landry ML, Warnock DW (ed), Manual of clinical microbiology, 10th ed, vol 1. ASM Press, Washington, DC.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    CLSI. 2016. Methods for antimicrobial dilution and disk susceptibility testing of infrequently isolated or fastidious bacteria, 3rd ed. CLSI guideline M45. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
  7. 7.↵
    1. Funke G,
    2. Punter V,
    3. von Graevenitz A
    . 1996. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of some recently established coryneform bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 40:2874–2878.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Soriano F,
    2. Zapardiel J,
    3. Nieto E
    . 1995. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of Corynebacterium species and other non-spore-forming Gram-positive bacilli to 18 antimicrobial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 39:208–214. doi:10.1128/AAC.39.1.208.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Qin L,
    2. Sakai Y,
    3. Bao R,
    4. Xie H,
    5. Masunaga K,
    6. Miura M,
    7. Hashimoto K,
    8. Tanamachi C,
    9. Hu B,
    10. Watanabe H
    . 2017. Characteristics of multidrug-resistant Corynebacterium spp. isolated from blood cultures of hospitalized patients in Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis 70:152–157.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    1. Rufael DW,
    2. Cohn SE
    . 1994. Native valve endocarditis due to Corynebacterium striatum: case report and review. Clin Infect Dis; 19:1054–1061. doi:10.1093/clinids/19.6.1054.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. 11.↵
    1. Camello TC,
    2. Souza MC,
    3. Martins CA,
    4. Damasco PV,
    5. Marques EA,
    6. Pimenta FP,
    7. Pereira GA,
    8. Hirata R, Jr,
    9. Mattos-Guaraldi AL
    . 2009. Corynebacterium pseudodiphtheriticum isolated from relevant clinical sites of infection: a human pathogen overlooked in emerging countries. Lett Appl Microbiol 48:458–464. doi:10.1111/j.1472-765X.2009.02553.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Martínez-Martínez L,
    2. Pascual A,
    3. Bernard K,
    4. Suarez AI
    . 1996. Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of Corynebacterium striatum. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 40:2671–2672.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Salem N,
    2. Salem L,
    3. Saber S,
    4. Ismail G,
    5. Bluth MH
    . 2015. Corynebacterium urealyticum: a comprehensive review of an understated organism. Infect Drug Resist 8:129–145. doi:10.2147/IDR.S74795.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. 14.↵
    1. Wagenlehner FM,
    2. Naber KG
    . 2006. Current challenges in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and prostatitis. Clin Microbiol Infect 12(Suppl 3):67–80. doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2006.01398.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Meštrović T,
    2. Sviben M,
    3. Profozić Z,
    4. Bedenić B,
    5. Ljubin-Sternak S
    . 2014. Ciprofloxacin-resistant Corynebacterium glucuronolyticum as a cause of male urethritis syndrome. JMM Case Rep 2:7.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    1. Soriano F,
    2. Tauch A
    . 2008. Microbiological and clinical features of Corynebacterium urealyticum: urinary tract stones and genomics as the Rosetta Stone. Clin Microbiol Infect 14:632–643. doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2008.02023.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Navas J,
    2. Fernandez-Martinez M,
    3. Salas C,
    4. Cano ME,
    5. Martinez-Martinez L
    . 2016. Susceptibility to aminoglycosides and distribution of Aph and aac(3)-XI genes among Corynebacterium striatum clinical isolates. PLoS One 11:e0167856. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167856.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  18. 18.↵
    1. Navas J,
    2. Salas C,
    3. Calvo J,
    4. Martinez-Martinez L
    . 2012. Activity of daptomycin and three comparator agents against non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium isolates of clinical interest. J Antimicrob Chemother 67:776–778. doi:10.1093/jac/dkr513.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Schoen C,
    2. Unzicker C,
    3. Stuhler G,
    4. Elias J,
    5. Einsele H,
    6. Grigoleit GU,
    7. Abele-Horn M,
    8. Mielke S
    . 2009. Life-threatening infection caused by daptomycin-resistant Corynebacterium jeikeium in a neutropenic patient. J Clin Microbiol 47:2328–2331. doi:10.1128/JCM.00457-09.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. McElvania TeKippe E,
    2. Thomas BS,
    3. Ewald GA,
    4. Lawrence SJ,
    5. Burnham CA
    . 2014. Rapid emergence of daptomycin resistance in clinical isolates of Corynebacterium striatum… a cautionary tale. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 33:2199–2205. doi:10.1007/s10096-014-2188-6.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. 21.↵
    1. Tran TT,
    2. Jaijakul S,
    3. Lewis CT,
    4. Diaz L,
    5. Panesso D,
    6. Kaplan HB,
    7. Murray BE,
    8. Wanger A,
    9. Arias CA
    . 2012. Native valve endocarditis caused by Corynebacterium striatum with heterogeneous high-level daptomycin resistance: collateral damage from daptomycin therapy? Antimicrob Agents Chemother 56:3461–3464. doi:10.1128/AAC.00046-12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Werth BJ,
    2. Hahn WO,
    3. Butler-Wu SM,
    4. Rakita RM
    . 2016. Emergence of high-level daptomycin resistance in Corynebacterium striatum in two patients with left ventricular assist device infections. Microb Drug Resist 22:233–237. doi:10.1089/mdr.2015.0208.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  23. 23.↵
    1. Ajmal S,
    2. Saleh OA,
    3. Beam E
    . 2017. Development of high-grade daptomycin resistance in Corynebacterium striatum while on therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 61:e00705-17. doi:10.1128/AAC.00705-17.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Salas C,
    2. Calvo J,
    3. Martinez-Martinez L
    . 2008. Activity of tigecycline against coryneform bacteria of clinical interest and Listeria monocytogenes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 52:1503–1505. doi:10.1128/AAC.01129-07.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Fernandez-Roblas R,
    2. Adames H,
    3. Martin-de-Hijas NZ,
    4. Almeida DG,
    5. Gadea I,
    6. Esteban J
    . 2009. In vitro activity of tigecycline and 10 other antimicrobials against clinical isolates of the genus Corynebacterium. Int J Antimicrob Agents 33:453–455. doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2008.11.001.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Shin JY,
    2. Lee WK,
    3. Seo YH,
    4. Park YS
    . 2014. Postoperative abdominal infection caused by Corynebacterium minutissimum. Infect Chemother 46:261–263. doi:10.3947/ic.2014.46.4.261.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  27. 27.↵
    1. Martínez-Martínez L,
    2. Suárez AI,
    3. Rodríguez-Baño J,
    4. Bernard K,
    5. Muniáin MA
    . 1997. Clinical significance of Corynebacterium striatum isolated from human samples. Clin Microbiol Infect 3:634–639. doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.1997.tb00470.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Verroken A,
    2. Bauraing C,
    3. Deplano A,
    4. Bogaerts P,
    5. Huang D,
    6. Wauters G,
    7. Glupczynski Y
    . 2014. Epidemiological investigation of a nosocomial outbreak of multidrug-resistant Corynebacterium striatum at one Belgian university hospital. Clin Microbiol Infect 20:44–50. doi:10.1111/1469-0691.12197.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Wang J,
    2. Wang Y,
    3. Du X,
    4. Cui J,
    5. Wang K,
    6. Zhang L,
    7. Han Y
    . 2016. Rapid transmission of multidrug-resistant Corynebacterium striatum among susceptible patients in a tertiary hospital in China. J Infect Dev Ctries 10:1299–1305. doi:10.3855/jidc.7577.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  30. 30.↵
    European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. 2017. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version 7.1. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, Växjö, Sweden. http://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/Breakpoint_tables/v_7.1_Breakpoint_Tables.pdf.
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
In Vitro Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern of Non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium Isolates in Ontario, Canada, from 2011 to 2016
Alefiya Neemuchwala, Deidre Soares, Vithusha Ravirajan, Alex Marchand-Austin, Julianne V. Kus, Samir N. Patel
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Mar 2018, 62 (4) e01776-17; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01776-17

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.
In Vitro Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern of Non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium Isolates in Ontario, Canada, from 2011 to 2016
(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
In Vitro Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern of Non-diphtheriae Corynebacterium Isolates in Ontario, Canada, from 2011 to 2016
Alefiya Neemuchwala, Deidre Soares, Vithusha Ravirajan, Alex Marchand-Austin, Julianne V. Kus, Samir N. Patel
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Mar 2018, 62 (4) e01776-17; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01776-17
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • INTRODUCTION
    • RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Corynebacterium
antibiotic resistance
penicillin resistance
susceptibility testing

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