Korean J Clin Microbiol.  2009 Dec;12(4):154-158.

Current Status of Antifungal Susceptibility Testing: Methods and Clinical Application

• Shin JH

Abstract

During the past two decades, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) antifungal susceptibility testing methods for both yeasts and molds have been developed and established in response to increasing invasive fungal infections and the release of multiple new antifungal agents. In addition, other methods including Etest, the disk diffusion test, and some CLSI modification methods have been intensively studied. Antifungal susceptibility tests are now routinely used for local epidemiological surveys to determine the susceptibility patterns of clinical isolates of fungi, the degree of antifungal activity of newly developed antifungal agents, and to predict the clinical outcomes of antifungal therapy for patients with Candida infections. It is anticipated that in the near future, antifungal susceptibility tests that can detect amphotericin B resistance, that can be used to establish the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) breakpoints of molds, and that can provide increased clinical guidance for antifungal therapy, will be developed. This review focuses on the various methods used for antifungal susceptibility testing and the clinical utility of antifungal susceptibility testing.

Keyword

Antifungal susceptibility; Candida; Molds; Amphotericin B; CLSI

MeSH Terms

Amphotericin B
Antifungal Agents
Candida
Diffusion
Fungi
Humans
Microbial Sensitivity Tests
Yeasts
Amphotericin B
Antifungal Agents

Reference

1. Johnson EM. Issues in antifungal susceptibility testing. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008; 61(Suppl 1):i13–8.

2. Rodriguez-Tudela JL, Alcazar-Fuoli L, Cuesta I, Alastruey-Izquierdo A, Monzon A, Mellado E, et al. Clinical relevance of resistance to antifungals. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008; 32(Suppl 2):S111–3.

3. Arikan S. Current status of antifungal susceptibility testing methods. Med Mycol. 2007; 45:567–87.

4. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts: approved standard, Third ed., M27-A3. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.2008.

5. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi: approved standard, Second ed., M38-A2. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.2008.

6. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Methods for antifungal disk diffusion testing of yeasts: approved standard, M44-A. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.2004.

7. Odds FC, Motyl M, Andrade R, Bille J, Cantón E, Cuenca-Estrella M, et al. Interlaboratory comparison of results of susceptibility testing with caspofungin against Candida and Aspergillus species. J Clin Microbiol. 2004; 42:3475–82.

8. Espinel-Ingroff A. Evaluation of broth microdilution testing parameters and agar diffusion Etest procedure for testing susceptibilities of Aspergillus spp. to caspofungin acetate (MK-0991). J Clin Microbiol. 2003; 41:403–9.

9. Yi JY, Shin JH, Lee KW, Yong D, Chae MJ, Suh SP, et al. Evaluation of spectrophotometric broth microdilution method to determine fluconazole MIC of Candida species. Korean J Lab Med. 2002; 22:253–9.

10. Yi JY, Shin JH, Lee KW, Yong DE, Yang SJ, Suh SP, et al. Evaluation of a spectrophotometric broth microdilution method for determining fluconazole susceptibility of Candida albicans: influence of RPMI and RPMI-2% glucose on the selection of endpoint criteria. Korean J Lab Med. 2002; 22:188–95.

11. Rex JH, Nelson PW, Paetznick VL, Lozano-Chiu M, Espinel-Lngroff A, Anaissie EJ. Optimizing the correlation between results of testing in vitro and therapeutic outcome in vivo for fluconazole by testing critical isolates in a murine model of invasive candidiasis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1998; 42:129–34.

12. Espinel-Ingroff A, Barchiesi F, Cuenca-Estrella M, Pfaller MA, Rinaldi M, Rodriguez-Tudela JL, et al. International and multicenter comparison of EUCAST and CLSI M27-A2 broth microdilution methods for testing susceptibilities of Candida spp. to fluconazole, itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole. J Clin Microbiol. 2005; 43:3884–9.

13. Bernal S, Aller AI, Chávez M, Valverde A, Serrano C, Gutiérrez MJ, et al. Comparison of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric microdilution panel and the NCCLS broth microdilution method for antifungal susceptibility testing against Candida species. Chemotherapy. 2002; 48:21–5.

14. Pfaller MA, Espinel-Ingroff A, Jones RN. Clinical evaluation of the sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal plate for antifungal susceptibility testing of the new triazoles voriconazole, posaconazole, and ravuconazole. J Clin Microbiol. 2004; 42:4577–80.

15. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Procop GW, Rinaldi MG. Multicenter comparison of the VITEK 2 yeast susceptibility test with the CLSI broth microdilution reference method for testing fluconazole against Candida spp. J Clin Microbiol. 2007; 45:796–802.

16. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Procop GW, Rinaldi MG. Multicenter comparison of the VITEK 2 antifungal susceptibility test with the CLSI broth microdilution reference method for testing amphotericin B, flucytosine, and voriconazole against Candida spp. J Clin Microbiol. 2007; 45:3522–8.

17. Kim DW, Shin JH, Kee SJ, Kim SH, Shin MG, Suh SP, et al. Evaluation of VITEK-2 antifungal susceptibility test (AST-YS01) for Candida species isolates from Korea. Korean J Clin Microbiol. 2009; 12:122–8.

18. Park JY, Shin JH, Uh Y, Kim EC, Kee SJ, Kim SH, et al. In vitro amphotericin B susceptibility of korean bloodstream yeast isolates assessed by the CLSI broth microdilution method, Etest, and Minimum fungicidal concentration test. Korean J Lab Med. 2008; 28:346–52.

19. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Boyken L, Messer SA, Tendolkar S, Hollis RJ. Evaluation of the etest and disk diffusion methods for determining susceptibilities of 235 bloodstream isolates of Candida glabrata to fluconazole and voriconazole. J Clin Microbiol. 2003; 41:1875–80.

20. Espinel-Ingroff A. Comparison of the E-test with the NCCLS M38-P method for antifungal susceptibility testing of common and emerging pathogenic filamentous fungi. J Clin Microbiol. 2001; 39:1360–7.

21. Rubio MC, Gil J, de Ocáriz IR, Benito R, Rezusta A. Comparison of results obtained by testing with three different agar media and by the NCCLS M27-A method for in vitro testing of fluconazole against Candida spp. J Clin Microbiol. 2003; 41:2665–8.

22. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Sheehan DJ. Interpretive breakpoints for fluconazole and Candida revisited: a blueprint for the future of antifungal susceptibility testing. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2006; 19:435–47.

23. Lozano-Chiu M, Nelson PW, Lancaster M, Pfaller MA, Rex JH. Lot-to-lot variability of antibiotic medium 3 when used for susceptibility testing of Candida isolates to amphotericin B. J Clin Microbiol. 1997; 35:270–2.

24. Park BJ, Arthington-Skaggs BA, Hajjeh RA, Iqbal N, Ciblak MA, Lee-Yang W, et al. Evaluation of amphotericin B interpretive breakpoints for Candida bloodstream isolates by correlation with therapeutic outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006; 50:1287–92.

25. Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes D, Benjamin DK Jr, Calandra TF, Edwards JE Jr, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2009; 48:503–35.