Evaluation of three commercial methods of susceptibility testing for ceftolozane/tazobactam against carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Bassetti, 2019, Ceftolozane/tazobactam for the treatment of serious Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections: a multicentre nationwide clinical experience, Int J Antimicrob Agents, 53, 408, 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2018.11.001 Cabot, 2014, Pseudomonas aeruginosa ceftolozane-tazobactam resistance development requires multiple mutations leading to overexpression and structural modification of ampc, Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 58, 3091, 10.1128/AAC.02462-13 Daragon, 2021, Performance of disc diffusion, MIC gradient tests and Vitek 2 for ceftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibactam susceptibility testing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, J Antimicrob Chemother, 76, 2586, 10.1093/jac/dkab236 Ito, 2021, Evaluation of MicroScan WalkAway for determination of ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam susceptibility in carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacilli, J Clin Microbiol, 59, e0153621, 10.1128/JCM.01536-21 Flynt, 2017, Comparison of etest to broth microdilution for testing of susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to ceftolozane-tazobactam, J Clin Microbiol, 55, 334, 10.1128/JCM.01920-16 Schaumburg, 2017, Susceptibility of MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa to ceftolozane/tazobactam and comparison of different susceptibility testing methods, J Antimicrob Chemother, 72, 3079, 10.1093/jac/dkx253 Bailey, 2018, Multicenter evaluation of the etest gradient diffusion method for ceftolozane–tazobactam susceptibility testing of Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, J Clin Microbiol, 56, 1, 10.1128/JCM.00717-18 FDA, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health. 2009. Guidance for Industry and FDA. Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) Systems 1-42. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) Systems – Class II Special Controls Guidance for Industry and FDA | FDA. Horcajada, 2019, Epidemiology and treatment of multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections, Clin Microbiol Rev, 32, 1, 10.1128/CMR.00031-19 Gill, 2020, Development and application of a pragmatic algorithm to guide definitive carbapenemase testing to identify carbapenemase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Antibiotics, 9, 1, 10.3390/antibiotics9110738 Álvarez-Marín, 2021, Do specific antimicrobial stewardship interventions have an impact on carbapenem resistance in Gram-negative bacilli? A multicentre quasi-experimental ecological study: time-trend analysis and characterization of carbapenemases, J Antimicrob Chemother, 76, 1928, 10.1093/jac/dkab073 International Organization for Standardization. 2006. Clinical laboratory testing and in vitro diagnostic test systems—susceptibility testing of infectious agents and evaluation of performance of antimicrobial susceptibility test devices—Part 1: Reference method for testing the in vitro activity of antimicrobials. International Standard 20776-1. ISO, Geneva, Switzerland. International Standard. 2021. In ISO (ed.), ISO 20776-2. Clinical laboratory testing and in vitro diagnostic test systems – suceptibility testing of infectious agents and evaluation of performance of antimicrobial susceptibility test devices. Part 2: Evaluation of performance of antimicrobial susceptibility. Second Ed. Geneva, Switzerland. Landis, 1977, The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data, Biometrics, 33, 159, 10.2307/2529310 Humphries, 2018, Performance of ceftolozane-tazobactam etest, MIC test strips, and disk diffusion compared to reference broth microdilution for beta-lactam-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates, J Clin Microbiol, 56, 1, 10.1128/JCM.01633-17 Shields, 2018, Verification of ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane- tazobactam susceptibility testing methods against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, J Clin Microbiol, 56, 1, 10.1128/JCM.01093-17