Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
ABSTRACT Although the Vitek 2 system is broadly used for antifungal susceptibility testing of Candida spp., its performance against Candida auris has been assessed using limited number of isolates recovered from restricted geographic areas. We therefore compared Vitek 2 system with the reference Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) broth microdilution method using an international collection of 100 C . auris isolates belonging to different clades. The agreement ±1 twofold dilution between the two methods and the categorical agreement (CA) based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) tentative resistance breakpoints and Vitek 2-specific wild-type upper limit values (WT-ULVs) were determined. The CLSI-Vitek 2 agreement was poor for 5-flucytosine (0%), fluconazole (16%), and amphotericin B (29%), and moderate for voriconazole (61%), micafungin (67%), and caspofungin (81%). Significant interpretation errors were recorded using the CDC breakpoints for amphotericin B (31% CA, 69% major errors; MaEs) and fluconazole (69% CA, 31% very major errors; VmEs), but not for echinocandins (99% CA, 1% MaEs for both micafungin and caspofungin) for which the Vitek 2 allowed correct categorization of echinocandin-resistant FKS1 mutant isolates. Discrepancies were reduced when the Vitek 2 WT-ULV of 16 mg/L for amphotericin B (98% CA, 2% MaEs) and of 4 mg/L for fluconazole (96% CA, 1% MaEs, 3% VmEs) were used. In conclusion, the Vitek 2 system performed well for echinocandin susceptibility testing of C .auris . Resistance to fluconazole was underestimated whereas resistance to amphotericin B was overestimated using the CDC breakpoints of ≥32 and ≥2 mg/L, respectively. Vitek 2 minimun inhibitory concentrations (MICs) >4 mg/L indicated resistance to fluconazole and Vitek 2 MICs ≤16 mg/L indicated non-resistance to amphotericin B.
Siopi et al. (Tue,) studied this question.