Multicenter Evaluation of the Novel ETEST Fosfomycin for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Enterobacterales, Enterococcus faecalis, and Staphylococcus Species

Goer, A; Blanchard, Laurine; Belkum, Alex van; Loftus, K J; Armstrong, Thomas P; Gatermann, Sören; Shortridge, Dee; Olson, Brooke J; Fritsche, Thomas R.; Pompilio, Marion; Halimi, Diane; Franceschi, Christine

doi:10.1128/jcm.00021-22

Cited by 8 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Goer A. et al evaluated the results of fosfomycin susceptibility obtained using the E-test vs. the ADM for E. coli and Staphylococcus strains. The CA was 97% and 91%, respectively, i.e., above the threshold (as in our own research), while the EA was at a much higher level of 98% and 94%, respectively [34]. The VME rate for E. coli was unsatisfactory (12.5%), and for S. aureus it was perfect (0%) [34].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability of E-Tests and the Phoenix Automated Method in Assessing Susceptibility to IV Fosfomycin—Comparative Studies Relative to the Reference Method

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

“…The CA was 97% and 91%, respectively, i.e., above the threshold (as in our own research), while the EA was at a much higher level of 98% and 94%, respectively [ 34 ]. The VME rate for E. coli was unsatisfactory (12.5%), and for S. aureus it was perfect (0%) [ 34 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Reliability of E-Tests and the Phoenix Automated Method in Assessing Susceptibility to IV Fosfomycin—Comparative Studies Relative to the Reference Method

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has shown efficacy against a range of bacteria, including enteric Gram‐negative bacteria like E. coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Enterobacter cloacae , and Gram‐positive cocci such as Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus pneumoniae , and Staphylococcus aureus . Fosfomycin has been evaluated as a treatment choice for infections caused by MDR bacteria [5] …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fosfomycin has been evaluated as a treatment choice for infections caused by MDR bacteria. [5] Resistance to Fosfomycin can occur through various mechanisms, including reduced permeability to antibiotics, impairment of target enzymes, and enzymatic inactivation. [6] Regardless of the mechanisms detailed earlier in the development of Fosfomycin resistance, the most important is enzymatic inactivation associated with fos genes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synergistic Antimicrobial Activity of Eugenol in Combination with Fosfomycin to Combat Escherichia coli and Potential Effect on Plasmid‐Mediated Fosfomycin Resistance Genes

Attaallah Ibrahim,

Kadhim Mohammed

2023

Chemistry & Biodiversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The presence of multidrug‐resistant pathogenic microorganisms makes it challenging to cure bacterial illnesses. Syzygium aromaticum has been used for medicinal purposes since ancient times. The objective of this study was to investigate the potential synergistic effect of the combination of Eugenol and Fosfomycin against clinically Uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) and their possible co‐treatment as well as their contribution to plasmid‐mediated Fosfomycin resistance (fosA3 and fosA4) genes using molecular assays. Eugenol was extracted from clove (Syzygium aromaticum) plants using steam distillation by Clevenger and analyzed by high‐performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). UPEC accounted for 63.6% of all isolates. Specifically, 99.3% of the UPEC isolates exhibited resistance to multiple types of antibiotics [multidrug‐resistant (MDR)]. The MIC for Eugenol was 1.25‐5 µg/mL, and Fosfomycin was 512‐1024 µg/mL, while the MBC for Eugenol was 5‐10 µg/mL and Fosfomycin was 2048 µg/mL. The synergistic effects were considerable, with 1/4 MIC of Eugenol resulting in 1/8 MIC Fosfomycin. Eugenol inhibited most of the UPEC isolates at 4‐8 hours, Fosfomycin at 8‐12 hours, and co‐treatment at 4‐8 hours. The fosA3 and fosA4 genes were detected in 5.7% and 2.9% of the isolates, respectively. The results showed variable gene expression changes in response to the different treatments.

show abstract

“…Biofilm forms in response to a number of factors such as high cellular density and unfavorable environmental conditions such as nutrient deficiencies or during antibiotic treatment (5), and biofilm-forming bacteria are responsible for chronic and incurable infections because they contribute to increased pathogenesis and (6) proved in his study that the biofilm has a protective role similar to the capsule in S. Typhi bacteria that is not surrounded by the capsule in giving it the ability to cause infection, as well as it has a key role as a shield for bacteria to stay for a longer period in the body, such as colonizing S. Typhi bacteria in chronic and asymptomatic gallbladder, This allows it to be transmitted to uninfected individuals (7), so treatment alternatives such as a probiotic are resorted to, which is characterized by its inhibitory effect on biofilm production and has no side effects in addition to its presence inside the body has multiple benefits (8).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of supernatant of Lactobacillus plantarum against Salmonella Typhi biofilm formation

2022

pnr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lactic acid bacteria are a safe and healthy alternative to antibiotics that have been attracted in many recent studies Methods: Salmonella. Typhi was diagnosed with the VETIC system, biofilm formation was detected by Congo red method and the microtiterplate method. L. plantarum capsule from (Swanson) company ATCC 53103 was used to obtain L.plantarum life cells. Results: The diagnostic results showed that 11 bacterial isolates from feces with a percentage 1.27% and 37(61%) bacterial isolates from blood represented S. Typhi bacteria with a total of 48 isolates and various levels of biofilm productivity, which were categorized as having strong production by 87%, average production by 6.25%, and weak production of membrane bioavailability by 2.1%. The inhibiting effect of L. Plantarum potential as a probiotic was investigated using the bacterial Cell Free Supernatant (CFS) of the same bacteria, which gave the highest inhibition area for S. Typhi and for three bacterial isolates, it was (16,18,17) mm compared to the inhibition of suspension which gave the lowest inhibition areas (16,15,15)mm. The results also showed that the CFS produced by L. plantarum had the ability to inhibit biofilm formation by 20 isolates of S.T. bacteria, in comparison with the positive control reading. The highest inhibition rate was 84.5% towards isolate S.T.4 and the lowest 70.8% inhibition of the S.t.35 isolate trend. Therefore, L. plantarum suspension can be presented as a viable healthy and therapeutic probiotic agent.

show abstract

Multicenter Evaluation of the Novel ETEST Fosfomycin for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Enterobacterales, Enterococcus faecalis, and Staphylococcus Species

Abstract: Fosfomycin is a phosphonic acid derivative active against a wide spectrum of Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens. It is used for the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTI) or severe infections by oral or intravenous (i.v.) administration.

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

Reliability of E-Tests and the Phoenix Automated Method in Assessing Susceptibility to IV Fosfomycin—Comparative Studies Relative to the Reference Method

Reliability of E-Tests and the Phoenix Automated Method in Assessing Susceptibility to IV Fosfomycin—Comparative Studies Relative to the Reference Method

Synergistic Antimicrobial Activity of Eugenol in Combination with Fosfomycin to Combat Escherichia coli and Potential Effect on Plasmid‐Mediated Fosfomycin Resistance Genes

The effect of supernatant of Lactobacillus plantarum against Salmonella Typhi biofilm formation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About