Head‐to‐head comparison of CLSI, EUCAST, Etest and VITEK®2 results for Candida auris susceptibility testing

Andrés Ceballos-Garzon, Guillermo Garcia-Effron, Susana Cordoba, Jose Y. Rodriguez, Carlos Alvarez-Moreno, Patrice Le Pape, Claudia Marcela Parra-Giraldo, Soraya Morales-López

Research output: Contribution to journalResearch Articlepeer-review

12 Scopus citations

Abstract

The susceptibility of 31 Candida auris clinical isolates was evaluated by four methods, namely the microdilution reference method according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines as well as Etest and VITEK®2. Essential agreement between the two reference methods was 90%. Etest showed a better overall agreement with the reference methods (94% and 81% for CLSI and EUCAST, respectively) than VITEK®2 (70% and 72%, respectively). Discrepancies were found for fluconazole (FLC) and amphotericin B. Considering categorical agreement (CDC tentative breakpoints), the majority of isolates were considered FLC-resistant (93.6% and 80.6% by CLSI and EUCAST, respectively). Furthermore, all isolates were considered susceptible to echinocandins by all methods. Susceptibility results should be interpreted with care if the VITEK®2 system is used to guide therapeutic decisions for C. auris infections.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number106558
JournalInternational Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
Volume59
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2022
Externally publishedYes

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Microbiology (medical)
  • Infectious Diseases
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this