ABSTRACT
The agar dilution method (ADM) recommended for IV fosfomycin (IV FOS) is complex and labor-intensive. Keeping in mind the reality of everyday laboratory work, we have evaluated the agreement of IV FOS susceptibility results obtained using the E-test and the Phoenix system with the results obtained using the ADM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The tests were performed on 860 strains. To evaluate susceptibility to IV FOS, BioMerieux E-tests (bioMerieux, Warsaw, Poland), BD Phoenix panels (BD Phoenix, Sparks, MD, USA), and the ADM were used. Clinical interpretation was performed in accordance with EUCAST Guidance (v12.0, 2021). The significance of the E-test and the Phoenix was analyzed in relation to the ADM by defining categorical agreement (CA), major error (ME), and very major error (VME). Essential agreement (EA) has also been defined for the E-test. A method was considered reliable, in accordance with ISO 20776-2:2007, when CA and EA were above 89.9% and VME was <3%. RESULTS: A categorical agreement of >98.9% was demonstrated between the E-test and the ADM for overall strains and for Echerichia coli, ESBL-producing Enterobacterales, and Staphylococcus aureus, while between the Phoenix and the ADM, a CA of >98.9% was shown only for Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and Proteus spp. A very major error rate of <3% was obtained only for Staphylococcus aureus and MBL-producing Pseudomonas evaluated by both the E-test and the Phoenix. An essential agreement of >98.9% between the E-test and the ADM has not been demonstrated for any of the tested groups of strains. The Phoenix yielded more VMEs than the E-test (50 and 46, respectively). The highest VME rate was demonstrated using the Phoenix method for Enterobacter spp. (53.83%). CONCLUSIONS: Both the E-test and the Phoenix have turned out to be reliable in assessing IV FOS susceptibility only for Staphylococcus aureus (CA > 89.9% and VME < 3%). For the remaining tested groups of strains and genera, the simultaneous high CA rate and low VME rate required by ISO were not achieved. Both methods fared particularly badly in detecting strains resistant to IV.
ABSTRACT
Multidrug resistance of bacteria has prompted intensive development work on new medicines, but also the search for effective options among the oldest antibiotics. Although intravenous fosfomycin (IVFOS) seems to be an interesting proposal, the recommended agar dilution method for susceptibility determination poses a major problem in routine diagnostic testing. As a consequence, there is a lack of comprehensive data on the frequency of isolation of susceptible or resistant strains. This fact triggered the disposition of EUCAST concerning the revision of IVFOS breakpoints (BPs), including withdrawal of BPs for Enterobacterales (excluding E. coli) and coagulase-negative staphylococci. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the activity of fosfomycin against numerous clinical strains using recommended methods. Materials and methods: A total of 997 bacterial strains were tested from the following genera: Enterobacterales, Pseudomonas spp., Staphylococcus spp., Acinetobacter spp., and Enterococcus spp., for which there are currently no BPs. The strains were isolated from various clinical materials from patients hospitalized in five hospitals. During the investigation, the recommended agar dilution method was used. Susceptibility to other antibiotics and resistance mechanisms were determined using an automatic method (Phoenix) the disk diffusion method, and E-tests. MIC values of fosfomycin were estimated for all strains and for susceptible and multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains individually. Results: Except for Acinetobacter and Enterococcus, 83% of the strains were susceptible to IVFOS, including the largest percentage of S. aureus and E. coli. Klebsiella spp. turned out to be the least susceptible strains (66%). The highest proportion of susceptibility to fosfomycin was found among strains that were sensitive to other antibiotics (80.9%), and the lowest was found among Gram-negative carbapenemase-producing bacteria (55.6%) and ESBL+ bacteria (61.6%). The MIC evaluation revealed the lowest MIC50 and MIC90 values for S. aureus (0.5 mg/L and 1 mg/L, respectively) and E. coli (4 mg/L and 32 mg/L, respectively). The highest values of MIC50 were found for Acinetobacter spp. (256 mg/L), while the highest values of MIC90 were found for Acinetobacter spp. and Klebsiella spp. (256 mg/L and 512 mg/L, respectively). Conclusions: IVFOS appears to be suitable for the treatment of many infections, including the empirical treatment of polymicrobial infections and those caused by MDR strains, since the sensitivity of the studied strains to this antibiotic in different groups ranged from 66% to as much as 99%. Sensitivity to fosfomycin was also demonstrated by 60% of carbapenem-resistant strains; therefore, IVFOS is one of the few therapeutic options that can be effective against the most resistant Gram-negative rods. In light of the general consultation posted by EUCAST, obtaining data such as IVFOS MIC value distributions may be vital for the decision of implementing fosfomycin into breakpoint tables.
