nach oben

Current Fungal Infection Reports

Erschienen in:

30.10.2017 | Clinical Mycology Lab Issues (S Córdoba, Section Editor)

Cryptococcus neoformans Epidemiological Cutoff Values

verfasst von: Giuseppe Ferrara, María Mercedes Panizo, Víctor Alarcón, Nataly García, Maribel Dolande

Erschienen in: Current Fungal Infection Reports | Ausgabe 4/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to provide a current view of the importance of the determination and use of epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) for Cryptococcus neoformans, since there are no clinical breakpoints (CBPs).

Recent Findings

ECVs have been proposed for some antifungal agents and C. neoformans, using standardized methodologies by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and by the European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), based on the distribution of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). There is no sufficient evidence for the determination of ECVs for C. neoformans using commercial methods; however, as these methods are routinely used in the microbiology laboratory, it is recommended for the establishment of local ECVs using these methods and following the criteria for their determination.

Summary

Due to the geographic and genetic variations inherent to C. neoformans, it is important to calculate ECVs, since they are useful in clinical practice to guide therapy in the absence of CBPs.

Perfect JR, Dismukes WE, Dromer F, Goldman DL, Graybill JR, Hamill RJ, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of cryptococcal disease: 2010 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50(3):291–322. https://doi.org/10.1086/649858.CrossRefPubMed

Pfaller MA, Lodge JK, Ghannoum MA. Drug resistance in Cryptococcus: epidemiology and molecular mechanisms. In: Heitman J, Kozel TR, Kwon-Chung KJ, Perfect JR, Casadevall A, editors. Cryptococcus: from human pathogen to model yeasts. Washington, DC: ASM Press; 2011.

Hagen F, Khayhan K, Theelen B, Kolecka A, Polacheck I, Sionov E, et al. Recognition of seven species in the Cryptococcus gattii/Cryptococcus neoformans species complex. Fungal Genet Biol. 2015;78:16–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fgb.2015.02.009.CrossRefPubMed

Kwon-Chung KJ, Bennett JE, Wickes BL, Meyer W, Cuomo CA, Wollenburg KR, et al. The case for adopting the “species complex” nomenclature for the etiologic agents of cryptococcosis. mSphere. 2017;2:e00357-16. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00357-16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hagen F, Thorsten Lumbsch H, Arsic Arsenijevic V, Badali H, Bertout S, Billmyre B, et al. Importance of resolving fungal nomenclature: the case of multiple pathogenic species in the Cryptococcus genus. mSphere. 2017;2:e00238-17. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00238-17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hanson KE, Catania J, Alexander BD, Perfect JR. Drug resistance in cryptococcosis. In: Mayers DL, Sobel JD, Ouellette M, Kaye KS, Marchaim D, editors. Antimicrobial drug resistance. Clinical and epidemiological aspects, Volume 2. Second ed. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG; 2017.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts: approved standard. CLSI document M27-A3. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2008.

Arendrup MC, Meletiades J, Moutoun JW, Lagrou K, Hamal P, Guinea J, and the Subcommittee Antifungal Susceptibility Testing (AFST) of the ESCMID European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testin (EUCAST) EUCAST definitive document E.Def 7.3.1: method for the determination of broth dilution minimum inhibitory concentrations of antifungal agents for yeasts. 2015. Available in: www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/AFST/Files/EUCAST_E_Def_7_3_1_Yeast_testing_definitive.pdf. Accessed 1 September, 2017.

• Pfaller MA, Castanheira M, Diekema DJ, Messer SA, Jones RN. Wild-type MIC distributions and epidemiologic cutoff values for fluconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole when testing Cryptococcus neoformans as determined by the CLSI broth microdilution method. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;71(3):252–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2011.07.007. It is the first multicenter study establishing ECVs for azoles in Cryptococcus neoformans and highlights the importance of using these points in epidemiological surveillance studies. CrossRefPubMed

10.

• Espinel-Ingroff A, Chowdhary A, Cuenca-Estrella M, Fothergill A, Fuller J, Hagen F, et al. Cryptococcus neoformans-Cryptococcus gattii complex: an international study of wild-type susceptibility endpoint distributions and epidemiological cutoff values for amphotericin B and flucytosine. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(6):3107–13. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.06252-11. Multicenter study where ECVs of amphotericin B and flucytosine are determined for Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii genotypes, with a large number of isolates and several centers from different geographic locations. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

• Espinel-Ingroff A, Aller AI, Canton E, Castañón-Olivares LR, Chowdhary A, Córdoba S, et al. Cryptococcus neoformans-Cryptococcus gattii species complex: an international study of wild-type susceptibility endpoint distributions and epidemiological cutoff values for fluconazole, itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(11):5898–906. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01115-12. Multicenter study where ECVs of azoles are determined for Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii genotypes, with a large number of isolates and several centers from different geographic locations. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Pfaller MA. Antifungal drug resistance: mechanisms, epidemiology, and consequences for treatment. Am J Med. 2012;125(1 Suppl):S3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.11.001. CrossRefPubMed

13.

Albataineh MT, Sutton DA, Fothergill AW, Wiederhold NP. Update from the laboratory: clinical identification and susceptibility testing of fungi and trends in antifungal resistance. Infect Dis Clin N Am. 2015;30(1):13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idc.2015.10.014. CrossRef

14.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts: approved standard. CLSI document M27-S3. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2008.

15.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing yeasts; M27-S4. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2012.

16.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Method for antifungal disk diffusion susceptibility testing of yeasts. In: Approved guideline. Document M44-A2. 2nd ed. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2009.

17.

Halliday CL, Slavin MA, Chen SC-A. Antifungal susceptibility testing of Candida and Cryptococcus species and mechanisms of resistance: implications for clinical laboratories. Curr Fungal Infect Rep. 2017;11(3):124–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12281-017-0282-9.CrossRef

18.

Arikan-Akdagli S, Rex JH. Fungal drug resistance assays. In: Mayers DL, Sobel JD, Ouellette M, Kaye KS, Marchaim D, editors. Antimicrobial drug resistance, Clinical and epidemiological aspects, Volume 2. Second ed. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG; 2017.

19.

Ghannoum MA, Ibrahim AS, Fu Y, Shafiq MC, Edwards JE Jr, Criddle RS. Susceptibility testing of Cryptococcus neoformans: a microdilution technique. J Clin Microbiol. 1992;30(11):2881–6.PubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Sanati H, Messer SA, Pfaller M, Witt M, Larsen R, Espinel-Ingroff A, et al. Multicenter evaluation of broth microdilution method for susceptibility testing of Cryptococcus neoformans against fluconazole. J Clin Microbiol. 1996;34(5):1280–2.

21.

Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Gibbs DL, Newell VA, Meis JF, Gould IM, et al. Results from the ARTEMIS DISK Global Antifungal Surveillance Study, 1997 to 2005: an 8.5 year analysis of susceptibility of Candida species and other yeast species to fluconazole and voriconazole determined by CLSI standardized disk diffusion testing. J Clin Microbiol. 2007;45(6):1735–45. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00409-07.

22.

Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Boyken L, Rice C, Tendolkar S, Hollis RJ, et al. Evaluation of the NCCLS M44-P disk diffusion method for determining fluconazole susceptibility of 276 clinical isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42(1):380–3. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.42.1.380-383.2004.

23.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Zone diameter interpretive standards and corresponding minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) interpretive breakpoints. Informational supplement M44-S3. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2009.

24.

Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Andes D, Arendrup MC, Brown SD, Lockhart SR, et al. Clinical breakpoints for the echinocandins and Candida revisited: integration of molecular, clinical and microbiological data to arrive at species-specific interpretive criteria. Drug Resist Updat. 2011;14(3):164–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drup.2011.01.004.

25.

Sanguinetti M, Posteraro B, La Sorda M, Torelli R, Fiori B, Santangelo R, et al. Role of AFR1, an ABC transporter encoding gene, in the in vivo response to fluconazole and virulence of Cryptococcus neoformans. Infect Immun. 2006;74(2):1352–9. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.74.2.1352-1359.2006.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Velez JD, Allendoerfer R, Luther M, Rinaldi MG, Graybill JR. Correlation of in vitro azole susceptibility with in vivo response in a murine model of cryptococcal meningitis. J Infect Dis. 1993;168(2):508–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/168.2.508.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Aller AI, Martin-Mazuelos E, Lozano F, Gomez-Mateos J, Steele-Moore L, Holloway WJ, et al. Correlation of fluconazole MICs with clinical outcome in cryptococcal infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000;44(6):1544–8. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.44.6.1544-1548.2000.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Dannaoui E, Abdul M, Arpin M, Michel-Nguyen A, Piens MA, Favel A, et al. Results obtained with various antifungal susceptibility testing methods do not predict early clinical outcome in patients with cryptococcosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50(7):2464–70. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01520-05.

29.

Lee C-H, Chang T-Y, Liu J-W, Chen F-J, Chien C-C, Tang Y-F, et al. Correlation of anti-fungal susceptibility with clinical outcomes in patients with cryptococcal meningitis. BMC Infect Dis. 2012;12:361. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-12-361.

30.

Sudan A, Livermore J, Howard SJ, Al-Nakeeb Z, Sharp A, Goodwin J, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of fluconazole for cryptococcal meningoencephalitis: implications for antifungal therapy and in vitro susceptibility breakpoints. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57(6):2793–800. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00216-13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Cuenca-Estrella M, Gómez-López A, Alastruey-Izquierdo A, Bernal-Martínez L, Cuesta I, Buitrago MJ, et al. Comparison of the Vitek 2 antifungal susceptibility system with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) broth microdilution reference methods and with the Sensititre YeastOne and Etest techniques for in vitro detection of antifungal resistance in yeast isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(5):1782–6. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02316-09.

32.

Cuenca-Estrella M. Antifungal drug resistance mechanisms in pathogenic fungi: from bench to bedside. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20(6 Suppl):54–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-0691.12495. CrossRefPubMed

33.

Johnson EM, Cavling-Arendrup M. Susceptibility test methods: yeasts and filamentous fungi. In: Jorgensen JH, Pfaller MA, editors. Manual of clinical microbiology. 11th ed. Washintong, DC: ASM Press; 2015.

34.

Mahabeer Y, Chang CC, Naidu D, Dorasamy A, Lewin S, Ndung'u T, et al. Comparison of Etest and Vitek 2® to broth microdilution for the susceptibility testing of Cryptococcus neoformans. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014;80(4):294–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2014.09.006.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Procop GW, Wiederhold NP. Multicenter evaluation of the new Vitek 2 yeast susceptibility test using new CLSI clinical breakpoints for fluconazole. J Clin Microbiol. 2014;52(6):2126–30. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00658-14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Tewari A, Behera B, Mathur P, Xess I. Comparative analysis of the Vitek 2 antifungal susceptibility system and E-test with the CLSI M27-A3 broth microdilution method for susceptibility testing of Indian clinical isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans. Mycopathologia. 2012;173(5–6):427–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11046-012-9528-9.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Aller AI, Martín-Mazuelos E, Gutiérrez MJ, Bernal S, Chávez M, Recio FJ. Comparison of the Etest and microdilution method for antifungal susceptibility testing of Cryptococcus neoformans to four antifungal agents. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2000;46(6):997–1000. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/46.6.997.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Maxwell MJ, Messer SA, Hollis RJ, Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA. Evaluation of Etest method for determining voriconazole and amphotericin B MICs for 162 clinical isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans. J Clin Microbiol. 2003;41(1):97–9. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.41.1.97-99.2003.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Thompson GR III, Fothergill AW, Wiederhold NP, Vallor AC, Wickes BL, Patterson TF. Evaluation of Etest method for determining isavuconazole MICs against Cryptococcus gattii and Cryptococcus neoformans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52(8):2959–61. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00646-08.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Lozano-Chiu M, Paetznick VL, Ghannoum MA, Rex JH. Detection of resistance to amphotericin B among Cryptococcus neoformans clinical isolates: performances of three different media assessed by using E-test and National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M27-A methodologies. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36(10):2817–22.PubMedPubMedCentral

41.

• Ochiuzzi ME, Santiso GM, Arechavala AI. Correlation of Etest and Neo-Sensitabs diffusion assays on Müeller-Hinton-methylene blue agar with broth microdilution reference method (CLSI-M27-A2) for testing susceptibilities of Cryptococcus neoformans to amphotericin B and fluconazole. Med Mycol. 2010;48(6):893–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/13693781003733750. In this article, the Etest method on Müeller-Hinton agar and the reference method M27-A2 were compared to determine the susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans to amphotericin B and fluconazole, obtaining an excellent agreement between both. CrossRefPubMed

42.

• Alvarado-Ramırez E, Torres-Rodríguez JM, Murciano F, Sellart M. Müeller-Hinton methylene blue media as an alternative to RPMI 1640 for determining the susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii to posaconazole with Etest. Mycoses. 2010;53(2):114–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0507.2008.01678.x. In this article, Etest on Müeller-Hinton agar medium is proposed as an alternative for determining the susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii to posaconazole. The authors obtained an excellent agreement when comparing it with the reference method M27-A2 on RPMI-1640 agar. CrossRefPubMed

43.

Turnidge J, Kahlmeter G, Kronvall G. Statistical characterization of bacterial wild-type MIC value distribution and the determination of epidemiological cut-off values. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2006;12(5):418–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2006.01377.x.CrossRefPubMed

44.

•• Lockhart SR, Ghannoum MA, Alexander BD. Establishment and use of epidemiological cutoff values for molds and yeasts using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute M57 standard. J Clin Microbiol. 2017;55(5):1262–8. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02416-16. The article emphasizes the determination of the ECVs using the M57 standard of the CLSI, establishes differences between CBPs and ECVs, and describes utility of ECVs. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

•• Espinel-Ingroff A, Turnidge J. The role of epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs/ECOFFs) in antifungal susceptibility testing and interpretation for uncommon yeasts and moulds. Rev Iberoam Micol. 2016;33(2):63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riam.2016.04.001. This article analyzes the criteria for the determination of ECVs in yeasts and filamentous fungi. In addition, it highlights the potential use of commercial methods for determining local or method-dependent ECVs. This review is published in a widely distributed journal in Latin America and Iberoamerican countries. CrossRefPubMed

46.

Kahlmeter G. The 2014 Garrod Lecture: EUCAST—are we heading towards international agreement? J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70(9):2427–39. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkv145.

47.

Kalhmeter G, Brown DF, Goldstein FW, MacGowan AP, Mouton JW, Osterlund A, et al. European harmonization of MIC breakpoints for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacteria. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003;52(2):145–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkg312.CrossRef

48.

Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Ghannoum MA, Rex JH, Alexander BD, Andes D, et al. Wild-type MIC distribution and epidemiological cutoff values for Aspergillus fumigatus and three triazoles as determined by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute broth microdilution methods. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47(10):3142–6. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00940-09.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. M57: principles and procedures for the development of epidemiological cutoff values for antifungal susceptibility testing. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2016.

50.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. M59: epidemiological cutoff values for antifungal susceptibility testing. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2016.

51.

Espinel-Ingroff A, Chowdhary A, Gonzalez GM, Guinea J, Hagen F, Meis JF, et al. Multicenter study of isavuconazole MIC distributions and epidemiological cutoff values for the Cryptococcus neoformans-Cryptococcus gattii species complex using the microdilution method. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(1):666–8. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.04055-14.

52.

Espinel-Ingroff A, Cuenca-Estrella M, Cantón E. EUCAST and CLSI: working together towards a harmonized method for antifungal susceptibility testing. Curr Fungal Infect Rep. 2013;7(1):59–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12281-012-0125-7.

53.

Córdoba S, Isla MG, Szusz W, Vivot W, Altamirano R, Davel G. Susceptibility profile and epidemiological cut-off values of Cryptococcus neoformans species complex for Argentina. Mycoses. 2016;59(6):351–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/myc.12479.

54.

Espinel-Ingroff A, Álvarez-Fernández M, Cantón E, Carver PL, Chen SC-A, Eschenauer G, et al. A multicenter study of epidemiological cutoff values and detection of resistance in Candida spp. to anidulafungin, caspofungin and micafungin using the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric method. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(11):6725–32. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01250-15.

Titel: Cryptococcus neoformans Epidemiological Cutoff Values
verfasst von: Giuseppe Ferrara
María Mercedes Panizo
Víctor Alarcón
Nataly García
Maribel Dolande
Publikationsdatum: 30.10.2017
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Current Fungal Infection Reports / Ausgabe 4/2017
Print ISSN: 1936-3761
Elektronische ISSN: 1936-377X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12281-017-0295-4

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

24.04.2024 | DGIM 2024 | Kongressbericht | Nachrichten

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Cryptococcus neoformans Epidemiological Cutoff Values

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Metformin rückt in den Hintergrund

Myokarditis nach Infekt – richtig schwierig wird es bei Profisportlern

Thrombophiliescreening – Wenn, dann richtig und nur bei therapeutischer Konsequenz

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

Update Innere Medizin

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2017

Candida auris: Antifungal Multi-Resistant Emerging Yeast

The Management of Chronic Pulmonary Aspergillosis: The UK National Aspergillosis Centre Approach

Onychomycoses in a Military Population in Brazil

Time-Kill Curves Studies with Amphotericin B Against Cryptococcus neoformans/C. gattii Species Complex Clinical Isolates

Detection of Cryptic Candida Species Recognized as Human Pathogens Through Molecular Biology Techniques

Erratum to: Harnessing Whole Genome Sequencing in Medical Mycology

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Metformin rückt in den Hintergrund

Myokarditis nach Infekt – richtig schwierig wird es bei Profisportlern

Thrombophiliescreening – Wenn, dann richtig und nur bei therapeutischer Konsequenz

Bei Senioren mit Prostatakarzinom auf Anämie achten!

Update Innere Medizin