Comparative Evaluation of Etest, EUCAST, and CLSI Methods for Amphotericin B, Voriconazole, and Posaconazole against Clinically Relevant Fusarium Species

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016 Dec 27;61(1):e01671-16. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01671-16. Print 2017 Jan.

Abstract

We compared EUCAST and CLSI methods versus Etest for antifungal susceptibility testing of 20 clinically relevant Fusarium species against amphotericin B, posaconazole, and voriconazole. The median Etest amphotericin B and posaconazole MICs were 1 dilution higher than the median EUCAST and the CLSI MICs. The essential agreement (within ±1/±2 dilutions) was 60/90%, 80/95%, and 70/85% between the Etest and EUCAST methods and 80/95%, 75/95%, and 45/100% between the Etest and CLSI methods for amphotericin B, voriconazole, and posaconazole, respectively. The categorical agreement was >85%. Etest can be used for antifungal susceptibility testing of Fusarium species.

Keywords: CLSI; EUCAST; Etest; Fusarium; RPB2; TEF1; amphotericin B; antifungal susceptibility; comparison; posaconazole; voriconazole.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Amphotericin B / pharmacology*
  • Antifungal Agents / pharmacology*
  • Fungal Proteins / genetics
  • Fungal Proteins / metabolism
  • Fusarium / drug effects*
  • Microbial Sensitivity Tests
  • Triazoles / pharmacology*
  • Voriconazole / pharmacology*

Substances

  • Antifungal Agents
  • Fungal Proteins
  • Triazoles
  • posaconazole
  • Amphotericin B
  • Voriconazole