Performance of fusidic acid (CEM-102) susceptibility testing reagents: Broth microdilution, disk diffusion, and Etest methods as applied to Staphylococcus aureus

Journal of Clinical Microbiology

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 972-976

  Jones, Ronald N ^a,b   Castanheira, Mariana ^a   Rhomberg, Paul R ^a   Woosley, Leah N ^a   Pfaller, Michael A ^a,c  

^a JMI LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CEM 102; FUSIDIC ACID; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; ANTIBIOTIC SENSITIVITY; ARTICLE; BROTH DILUTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISK DIFFUSION; DRUG ACTIVITY; EPSILOMETER TEST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; METHICILLIN RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STAPHYLOCOCCUS INFECTION;

ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; CANADA; FUSIDIC ACID; HUMANS; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS; STAPHYLOCOCCAL INFECTIONS; STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; UNITED STATES;

METHICILLIN RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS;

EID: 77749255802     PISSN: 00951137     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01829-09     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Anderson, J. D. 1980. Fusidic acid: new opportunities with an old antibiotic. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 122:765-769.
2. Besier, S., A. Ludwig, V. Brade, and T. A. Wichelhaus. 2005. Compensatory adaptation to the loss of biological fitness associated with acquisition of fusidic acid resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 49:1426-1431.
3. Biedenbach, D. J., and R. N. Jones. 2009. Multicenter evaluation of the in vitro activity of dalbavancin tested against staphylococci and streptococci in 5 European countries: results from the DECIDE Surveillance Program (2007). Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 64:177-184.
4. Boucher, H. W., G. H. Talbot, J. S. Bradley, J. E. Edwards, D. Gilbert, L. B. Rice, M. Scheld, B. Spellberg, and J. Bartlett. 2009. Bad bugs, no drugs: no ESKAPE! An update from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 48:1-12.
5. CLSI. 2009. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests; approved standard M02-A10, 10th ed. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
6. CLSI. 2009. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically; approved standard M07-A8, 8th ed. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
7. CLSI. 2008. Development of in vitro susceptibility testing criteria and quality control parameters; approved guideline M23-A3, 3rd ed. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
8. CLSI. 2009. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 19th informational supplement. M100-S19. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
9. Corey, G. R. 2009. Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections: definitions and treatment. Clin. Infect. Dis. 48(Suppl. 4):S254-S259.
10. Cornaglia, G., and G. M. Rossolini. 2009. Forthcoming therapeutic perspectives for infections due to multidrug-resistant Gram-positive pathogens. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 15:218-223.
11. Coutant, C., D. Olden, J. Bell, and J. D. Turnidge. 1996. Disk diffusion interpretive criteria for fusidic acid susceptibility testing of staphylococci by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards method. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 25:9-13.
12. Dobie, D., and J. Gray. 2004. Fusidic acid resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Arch. Dis. Child. 89:74-77.
13. EUCAST. 2009. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. http://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST-files/Disk-test-documents/ EUCAST-breakpoints-v1.0-20091221.pdf.
14. Hoban, D. J., D. J. Biedenbach, A. H. Mutnick, and R. N. Jones. 2003. Pathogen of occurrence and susceptibility patterns associated with pneumonia in hospitalized patients in North America: results of the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Study (2000). Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 45:279-285.
15. Howden, B. P., and M. L. Grayson. 2006. Dumb and dumber-the potential waste of a useful antistaphylococcal agent: emerging fusidic acid resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Clin. Infect. Dis. 42:394-400.
16. Jones, R. N., and J. E. Ross. 2009. Initial quality control (QC) ranges for CEM-102 (fusidic acid [FA]) using the CLSI multi-laboratory M23-A3 study design, abstr. D1435. Proc. 49th Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC.
17. Lode, H. M. 2009. Clinical impact of antibiotic-resistant Gram-positive pathogens. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 15:212-217.
18. Metzler, C. M., and R. M. DeHaan. 1974. Susceptibility tests of anaerobic bacteria: statistical and clinical considerations. J. Infect. Dis. 130:588-594.
19. Moran, G. J., A. Krishnadasan, R. J. Gorwitz, G. E. Fosheim, L. K. McDougal, R. B. Carey, and D. A. Talan. 2006. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus infections among patients in the emergency department. N. Engl. J. Med. 355:666-674.
20. Skov, R., N. Frimodt-Moller, and F. Espersen. 2001. Correlation of MIC methods and tentative interpretive criteria for disk diffusion susceptibility testing using NCCLS methodology for fusidic acid. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 40:111-116.
21. Toma, E., and D. Barriault. 1995. Antimicrobial activity of fusidic acid and disk diffusion susceptibility testing criteria for Gram-positive cocci. J. Clin. Microbiol. 33:1712-1715.