Impact of the introduction of EUCAST's concept of "area of technical uncertainty".

On the first of January 2019, the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, EUCAST, introduced the concept of "area of technical uncertainty" (ATU). The aim was to report on the incidence of ATU test results in a selection of common bacterial species and the subsequent impact on antimicrobial resistance categorization and workload. A retrospective analysis of clinical samples collected from February 2019 until November 2019 was performed. Susceptibility to amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and piperacillin-tazobactam in Enterobacterales (Escherichia spp., Klebsiella spp., Proteus spp.), piperacillin-tazobactam in Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and cefuroxime in Haemophilus influenzae was studied. Disk diffusion antibiotic susceptibility testing was read and interpreted by ADAGIO 93400 automated system (Bio-Rad, France). In case of an inhibition zone in the ATU, strains were retested using gradient minimal inhibitory concentration method (Etest, BioMérieux, France). Overall, 14,164 isolate-antibiotic combinations were tested in 7922 isolates, resulting in 1204 (8.5%) disk zone diameters in the ATU region. Retesting of ATUs with Etest resulted in a category change from S to R for amoxicillin-clavulanic acid in 63/498 (12.7%) of Escherichia spp., 2/58 (3.4%) of Klebsiella spp., 2/37 (5.4%) of Proteus spp., and 6/125 (4.8%) of Haemophilus influenzae. For piperacillin-tazobactam, a category change from S to R was found in 33/92 (35.9%) of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. We conclude that ATU testing has a substantial impact on the correct interpretation of antimicrobial resistance, at the expense of turn-around time and with the cost of additional workload.

Evaluation of the ELITe InGenius and Bordetella ELITe MGB Kit for the detection and identification of B. pertussis, B. parapertussis and B. holmesii.

Bordetella pertussis is the causative pathogen of whooping cough or pertussis, a contagious respiratory disease. Aside from serodiagnosis, laboratory confirmation of pertussis is done through PCR, as B. pertussis is difficult to culture. The ELITe InGenius instrument (ELITechGroup, France) with accompanying Bordetella ELITe MGB Kit was evaluated against a laboratory-developed assay. Both assays combine two screening (IS481, IS1001) and two confirmation targets (recA, ptxA-Pr or IS1002) for optimal sensitivity and specificity. The company's stated claims on sensitivity and reproducibility were confirmed. Accuracy testing showed full concordance between both assays for the screening targets. Minor discrepancies were seen for the B. pertussis confirmation target. Some cross-reactivity with other Bordetella species was observed for the IS481-target, however, none of these were confirmed in the ptxA-Pr target. These results show the suitability of the Bordetella ELITe MGB Kit for the detection and differentiation of B. pertussis, B. parapertussis and B. holmesii.

Aztreonam-avibactam synergy, a validation and comparison of diagnostic tools.

Introduction: Antimicrobial resistance is a growing problem that necessitates the development of new therapeutic options. Cefiderocol and aztreonam (AT) are often the last active ß-lactams for treating metallo-ß-lactamases (MBL)-producing Gram-negative bacilli. In these difficult-to-treat bacterial strains, AT resistance is frequently attributed to the co-occurrence of other resistance mechanisms. In the case of ß-lactamases they can often be inhibited by avibactam. In the present study, we evaluated the use of the double-disc synergy test (DDST) as a screening tool for the detection of synergy between AT-avibactam (ATA). We validated both the Gradient Diffusion Strips (GDSs) superposition method and the commercially available Liofilchem's ATA GDS. Materials and methods: We tested AT susceptibility in combination with ceftazidime-avibactam for 65 strains, including 18 Serine-ß-Lactamase (SBL)- and 24 MBL-producing Enterobacterales, 12 MBL-producing P. aeruginosa, and 11 S. maltophilia isolates. Interpretation was done with EUCAST breakpoints (version 13.0), AT breakpoints being used for ATA. The accuracy and validity of the GDSs superposition method and ATA GDS were evaluated using an AT GDS applied on Mueller Hinton Agar plates supplemented with avibactam (MH-AV). A DDST was performed to screen for synergy between antibiotic combinations. Results: Using MH-AV, all SBL- and MBL-positive Enterobacterales were susceptible or susceptible at increased exposure to the combination AT-avibactam. In contrast, only 2 out of the 12 (17%) P. aeruginosa strains and 9/11 (82%) of the S. maltophilia strains were susceptible- or susceptible at increased exposure for the combination of AT-avibactam. The DDST detected all synergies, demonstrating a 100% sensitivity and 100% negative predictive value for all bacterial strains. Conclusion: The DDST is a sensitive tool for screening for antibiotic synergy. Unlike S. maltophilia and SBL- and MBL-positive Enterobacterales, most MBL-positive P. aeruginosa strains remain resistant to AT-avibactam. ATA GDS should be preferred for MIC determination of the AT-avibactam combination, while the GDSs superposition method can be used as an alternative to the commercial test.

Sensitivity and specificity of 14 SARS-CoV-2 serological assays and their diagnostic potential in RT-PCR negative COVID-19 infections.

BACKGROUND: Molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory samples is the gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis but it has a long turnaround time and struggles to detect low viral loads. Serology could help to diagnose suspected cases which lack molecular confirmation. Two case reports are presented as illustration. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of several commercial assays for COVID-19 serology. We illustrated the added value of COVID-19 serology testing in suspect COVID-19 cases with negative molecular test. STUDY DESIGN: Twenty-three sera from 7 patients with a confirmed molecular diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 were tested using 14 commercial assays. Additionally, 10 pre-pandemic sera and 9 potentially cross-reactive sera were selected. We calculated sensitivity and specificity. Furthermore, we discuss the diagnostic relevance of COVID-19 serology in a retrospective cohort of 145 COVID-19 cases in which repetitive molecular and serological SARS-CoV-2 tests were applied. RESULTS: The interpretation of the pooled sensitivity of IgM/A and IgG resulted in the highest values (range 14-71% on day 2-7; 88-94% on day 8-18). Overall, the specificity of the assays was high (range 79-100%). Among 145 retrospective cases, 3 cases (2%) remained negative after sequential molecular testing but positive on final SARS-CoV-2 serology. CONCLUSION: Sensitivity of COVID-19 serological diagnosis was variable but consistently increased at >7 days after symptom onset. Specificity was high. Our data suggest that serology can complement molecular testing for diagnosis of COVID-19, especially for patients presenting the 2nd week after symptom onset or later.

Diagnostic and analytical performance evaluation of ten commercial assays for detecting SARS-CoV-2 humoral immune response.

OBJECTIVE: Analytical validation of newly released SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays in the clinical laboratory is crucial to ensure sufficient performance in respect to its intended use. We aimed to assess analytical and diagnostic performance of 8 (semi-)quantitative assays detecting anti-nucleocapsid IgG (Euroimmun, Id-Vet) or total Ig (Roche), anti-spike protein IgG (Euroimmun, Theradiag, DiaSorin, Thermo Fisher) or both (Theradiag) and 2 rapid lateral flow assays (LFA) (AAZ-LMB and Theradiag). METHODS: Specificity was evaluated using a cross-reactivity panel of 85 pre-pandemic serum samples. Sensitivity was determined at both the manufacturer's and a 95% specificity cut-off level, using 81 serum samples of patients with a positive rRT-PCR. Sensitivity was determined in function of time post symptoms onset. RESULTS: Specificity for all assays ranged from 92.9% to 100% (Roche and Thermo Fisher) with the exception of the Theradiag IgM LFA (82.4%). Sensitivity in asymptomatic patients ranged between 41.7% and 58.3%. Sensitivity on samples taken <10 days since symptom onset was low (23.3%-66.7%) and increased on samples taken between 10 and 20 days and > 20 days since symptom onset (80%-96% and 92.9%-100%, respectively). From 20 days after symptom onset, the Roche, Id-vet and Thermo Fisher assays all met the sensitivity (>95%) and specificity (>97%) targets determined by the WHO. Antibody signal response was significantly higher in the critically ill patient group. CONCLUSION: Antibody detection can complement rRT-PCR for the diagnosis of COVID-19, especially in the later stage, or in asymptomatic patients for epidemiological purposes. Addition of IgM in LFAs did not improve sensitivity.