Day at the Races: Comparing BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture ID Panels With Verigene Blood Culture Panel in Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infections Using DOOR-MAT Analysis

Claeys, Kimberly C; Schlaffer, Kathryn; Smith, Richard T.; Hitchcock, Stephanie; Jiang, Yunyun; Evans, Scott; Johnson, J. Kristie; Leekha, Surbhi

doi:10.1093/cid/ciab262

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further studies in a multicenter setting are warranted to determine the usefulness and possible problems of the BCID2, especially concerning its effect on patient management and outcomes. In fact, a recent study showed, in a retrospective analysis, a superiority of BCID2 to BCID1 and Verigene BC-Gram negative for theoretical optimal antimicrobial prescribing decisions ( 29 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usefulness of BioFire FilmArray BCID2 for Blood Culture Processing in Clinical Practice

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid pathogen characterization from positive blood cultures (BC) can improve management of patients with blood stream infections (BSI). The FilmArray blood culture identification (BCID) assay is a molecular test approved for direct identification of BSI causing pathogens from positive BC. A recently updated version of the panel (BCID2) comprises improved species identification characteristics, and allows for the detection of one ESBL- and several carbapenemase-encoding genes. Here, the clinical performance of the BCID2 assay for species identification in 180 positive BCs was evaluated. BCID2 results were concordant with standard of care (SOC) in 159/180 (88.3%) BCs. 68/74 (91.9%) and 71/74 (96.0%) of all samples growing mono-bacterial, Gram-positive or Gram-negative pathogens, respectively, were identified in agreement with SOC results. Non-concordance was related to the detection of additional pathogens by the BCID2 (n= 4), discrepant species identification (n= 4), or failure of BCID2 to detect on-panel pathogens (n= 1). A number (12/31; 38.7%) of discordant results became evident in poly-microbial BC specimens. BCID2 identified presence of blaCTX-M carrying species in 12 BC specimens, but failed to predict a third-generation cephalosporin resistance in four isolates exhibiting independent cephalosporin-resistance mechanisms. Carbapenem-resistance related to the presence of blaVIM-2 or blaOxa-48-like was correctly predicted in two isolates. In conclusion, BCID2 assay is a reliable tool for rapid BC processing and species identification. Despite inclusion of common ESBL- or carbapenemase-encoding markers, the multifactorial nature of β–lactam resistance in Gram-negative organisms warrants combination of BCID2 with (rapid) phenotypic susceptibility assays.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usefulness of BioFire FilmArray BCID2 for Blood Culture Processing in Clinical Practice

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A new version of this assay has been recently released (BioFire Blood Culture Identification 2 Panel, bioMerieux, France) resulting in a broader panel including 33 pathogens (26 bacterial genera/species and 7 fungal species) and 10 resistance markers; few studies have evaluated the performance of BCID2 on clinical samples so far [10,11,12,13,14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of the BioFire Blood Culture Identification 2 panel for the diagnosis of bloodstream infections

Peri

Bauer

Bergh

et al. 2022

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Examples of the DOOR MAT approach include an examination 41 of treatment of E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream infections at the Veteran's Health Administration and a comparison 42 of potential effect of different rapid diagnostic platforms on antimicrobial prescribing. As a metric of antibiotic prescribing appropriateness, this analysis approach could be complementary to antimicrobial stewardship programs wanting to measure quality of prescriptions in addition to the typical metrics that mainly address quantity of prescriptions (e.g., days of therapy).…”

Section: Door Matmentioning

confidence: 99%

Desirability of outcome ranking and quality life measurement for antimicrobial research in organ transplantation

Doernberg

2022

Transplant Infectious Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Current clinical trials of new antibiotics facilitate bringing new drugs to market but often fail to provide useful information for clinical decision making. Methods: Literature review of desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) in antibiotic clinical trials and description how DOOR can fit into design, administration, and assessment of clinical trials. Results: DOOR is an approach that addresses many of the shortcomings of current trials by incorporating efficacy and safety into a single outcome to analyze the patient experience in its entirety. Application of partial credit, tiebreaker strategies including response adjusted for duration of antibiotic risk (RADAR), and DOOR for Management of Antimicrobial Therapy (DOOR MAT) provides additional nuance and granularity. To address pitfalls of DOOR, investigators must develop the DOOR a priori, ideally with input from and incorporation of patient voices, and should perform component analysis to ensure that imbalances in key components are detected. Conclusion: Inclusion of DOOR in clinical trials will enrich our understanding of how new antibiotics might benefit patients who have had transplantation. Additional work to develop best practices for DOOR selection, analysis, and interpretation must continue, and incorporation of the patient perspective is essential. K E Y W O R D S antibiotic-resistant bacteria, clinical trial design, desirability of outcome ranking, health-related quality of life THE CURRENT STATE OF CLINICAL TRIALS FOR NEW ANTIBIOTICSAntibiotics have saved millions of lives in the modern medical era and helped pave the way for modern surgical development, including solid organ transplantation. 1,2 However, in the setting of immunosuppression, anatomic issues that arise after surgery, donor-derived

show abstract

Day at the Races: Comparing BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture ID Panels With Verigene Blood Culture Panel in Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infections Using DOOR-MAT Analysis

Cited by 10 publications

References 14 publications

Usefulness of BioFire FilmArray BCID2 for Blood Culture Processing in Clinical Practice

Usefulness of BioFire FilmArray BCID2 for Blood Culture Processing in Clinical Practice

Performance of the BioFire Blood Culture Identification 2 panel for the diagnosis of bloodstream infections

Desirability of outcome ranking and quality life measurement for antimicrobial research in organ transplantation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About