Chandrasekaran, Sukantha

ABSTRACT Achromobacter species can cause opportunistic infections which are difficult to treat due to a variety of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) mechanisms. As such, antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is a cornerstone to successful treatment for these organisms. Currently, there are no specific Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) AST guidelines for Achromobacter species. The purpose of this study was to (i) establish tentative CLSI M45 MIC and disk diffusion (DD) breakpoints (BPs), (ii) evaluate the modified carbapenem inactivation method (mCIM), and (iii) understand the mechanisms mediating AMR among Achromobacter species. Contemporary MIC data from multiple sources were collated to define the tentative epidemiological cutoff values (tECVs), and the MIC distributions were used to inform the establishment of MIC BPs for various agents. A disk-to-MIC correlate study with 91 isolates from across the United States was completed by testing reference broth microdilution and DD from the same inoculum and applying the dBETS software to establish DD BPs. Lastly, the mCIM and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) were pursued. The tECVs for piperacillin-tazobactam, imipenem, and meropenem were 1, 2, and 0.5 µg/mL, respectively. Disk correlates met CLSI M23 acceptance criteria with a few exceptions related to a small number of isolates, resulting in high minor errors. WGS revealed that 82 (90.1%) isolates harbored a bla OXA variant with bla OXA-114 predominating (90.2%). Nineteen isolates harbored acquired beta-lactamase genes, including 16 bla AXC , 2 bla VIM-4 , and 1 bla AZM-1. The mCIM had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 87%. Upon review, the CLSI M45 committee set tentative MIC and DD BPs for piperacillin-tazobactam, imipenem, meropenem, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. IMPORTANCE Achromobacter species can cause opportunistic infections which may be difficult to treat due to a variety of antimicrobial resistance mechanisms. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing is a critical component of patient treatment for these infections. Currently, the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute M100 non-Enterobacterales susceptibility test interpretive criteria and methodology are utilized for Achromobacter by clinical laboratories and likely do not accurately predict susceptibility results for Achromobacter species. This study was designed to establish tentative MIC and disk diffusion breakpoints specific to Achromobacter species.

Abstract Background Rapid blood culture diagnostics are of unclear benefit for patients with gram-negative bacilli (GNB) bloodstream infections (BSIs). We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing outcomes of patients with GNB BSIs who had blood culture testing with standard-of-care (SOC) culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) vs rapid organism identification (ID) and phenotypic AST using the Accelerate Pheno System (RAPID). Methods Patients with positive blood cultures with Gram stains showing GNB were randomized to SOC testing with antimicrobial stewardship (AS) review or RAPID with AS. The primary outcome was time to first antibiotic modification within 72 hours of randomization. Results Of 500 randomized patients, 448 were included (226 SOC, 222 RAPID). Mean (standard deviation) time to results was faster for RAPID than SOC for organism ID (2.7 [1.2] vs 11.7 [10.5] hours; P < .001) and AST (13.5 [56] vs 44.9 [12.1] hours; P < .001). Median (interquartile range [IQR]) time to first antibiotic modification was faster in the RAPID arm vs the SOC arm for overall antibiotics (8.6 [2.6–27.6] vs 14.9 [3.3–41.1] hours; P = .02) and gram-negative antibiotics (17.3 [4.9–72] vs 42.1 [10.1–72] hours; P < .001). Median (IQR) time to antibiotic escalation was faster in the RAPID arm vs the SOC arm for antimicrobial-resistant BSIs (18.4 [5.8–72] vs 61.7 [30.4–72] hours; P = .01). There were no differences between the arms in patient outcomes. Conclusions Rapid organism ID and phenotypic AST led to faster changes in antibiotic therapy for gram-negative BSIs. Clinical Trials Registration NCT03218397.

Abstract Background Rapid blood culture diagnostics increase cost and have unclear benefit for patients with Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) bloodstream infections (BSIs). We conducted a multicenter, prospective randomized controlled trial (RAPIDS-GN), comparing outcomes of patients with GNB BSI who had blood culture testing with standard of care (SOC) culture and antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) vs. rapid organism identification (ID) and phenotypic AST using the Accelerate Pheno System (AXDX). Methods Subjects with blood culture Gram stain showing GNB were randomized to receive SOC testing with antimicrobial stewardship review (AS) or AXDX plus SOC testing with AS, at two academic medical centers between October 2017 and October 2018. SOC testing included rapid MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry ID and agar dilution or broth microdilution AST. In a modified intention to treat analysis, subjects were excluded if: Gram stain was erroneous, culture was positive during off-hours, blood culture in the prior week had GNB, they were deceased/on comfort care, or admitted to a nonparticipating hospital. The primary outcome was time to first antibiotic modification within 72 hours after randomization. Subjects without antibiotic modifications were assigned a time of 72 hours. No censoring was observed. T-tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for statistical analyses. Results Of 500 randomized subjects, 448 were included (226 SOC, 222 AXDX). Groups did not differ in baseline characteristics (Table 1). Median (IQR) hours to first antibiotic modification was faster in the AXDX vs. SOC group [8.6 (2.6, 27.6) vs. 14.9 (3.3, 41.1)], P = 0.02 (Figure 1). Median (IQR) hours to first Gram-negative antibiotic modification (including escalation and de-escalation) was faster in the AXDX than SOC group [17.4 (4.9, 72) vs. 42.1 (10.1, 72)], P < 0.001 (Figure 2). Groups did not differ in clinical outcomes (Table 2). Mean (S.D.) time to results was faster for AXDX than SOC for organism ID [2.7 (1.2) h vs. 15.6 (20.3) h, P < 0.001] and AST [13 (55.7) h vs. 54.6 (45.5) h, P < 0.001]. Conclusion In the largest trial to evaluate the clinical impact of a blood culture diagnostic for GNB BSI, we found that rapid organism ID and phenotypic AST led to faster changes in antibiotic therapy for Gram-negative bacteremia. Disclosures Ritu Banerjee, MD, PhD, Accelerate Diagnostics: Grant/Research Support; BioFire: Research Grant; Biomerieux: Research Grant; Roche: Research Grant Robin Patel, MD, ASM and IDSA: Other Financial or Material Support, Travel reimbursement, editor’s stipends; CD Diagnostics, Merck, Hutchison Biofilm Medical Solutions, Accelerate Diagnostics, ContraFect, TenNor Therapeutics Limited, Shionogi: Grant/Research Support; Curetis, Specific Technologies, NextGen Diagnostics, PathoQuest, Qvella: Consultant; NBME, Up-to-Date, the Infectious Diseases Board Review Course: Honorarium recipient, Other Financial or Material Support; Patent on Bordetella pertussis/parapertussis PCR issued, a patent on a device/method for sonication with royalties paid by Samsung to Mayo Clinic, and a patent on an anti-biofilm substance issued: Other Financial or Material Support, Patents.

ABSTRACT The performance of a disk diffusion test using broth from positive blood cultures as inoculum (direct disk diffusion [dDD]) was evaluated for a collection of 20 challenge isolates of Enterobacteriaceae , Acinetobacter baumannii , and Pseudomonas aeruginosa . Isolates seeded into human blood were inoculated into Bactec Plus Aerobic/F, VersaTREK Redox 1, and BacT/Alert FA Plus bottles and incubated in the respective automated blood culture systems. Disk diffusion results were compared to reference disk diffusion results. Categorical agreement (CA) values for dDD, after removal of random errors due to natural MIC variation, were 87.8%, 88.4%, and 92.2% for the BacT/Alert, Bactec, and VersaTREK systems, respectively. No very major errors (VME) were observed, and major error (ME) rates were 3.0%, 2.3%, and 1.7%, respectively. Incubation of the dDD test samples for 6 h compared to incubation for 16 to 18 h resulted in 19.9% of tests having too light of growth to allow reading of zones of inhibition. Among the evaluable dDD tests, CA values were 58.9%, 76.6%, and 73.2% for the isolates seeded into the BacT/Alert, Bactec, and VersaTREK systems, respectively. VME rates for isolates seeded into these systems were 2.2%, 1.8%, and 3.0%, respectively, and ME rates were 25.4%, 6.1%, and 2.8%, respectively, at the 6-h reading. The best performance of dDD was found for blood cultures with bacterial concentrations in the range of 7.6 × 10 7 to 5.0 × 10 8 CFU/ml; CA values ranged from 94.7 to 96.2% for these concentrations after 18 h of incubation and from 76.9 to 84.1% after 6 h of incubation. These preliminary data demonstrate the potential accuracy of dDD testing by the clinical laboratory.