Measuring individual colony MICs is a more sensitive method to detect the effect of antimicrobials on antimicrobial susceptibility than the proportion of colonies resistant.
Vergel Ledesma, Thibaut Vanbaelen, Zina Gestels, Nele Panis, Said Abdellati, Tessa de Block, Irith De Baetselier, Dorien Van den Bossche, Sheeba Santhini Manoharan-Basil, Chris Kenyon
{"title":"Measuring individual colony MICs is a more sensitive method to detect the effect of antimicrobials on antimicrobial susceptibility than the proportion of colonies resistant.","authors":"Vergel Ledesma, Thibaut Vanbaelen, Zina Gestels, Nele Panis, Said Abdellati, Tessa de Block, Irith De Baetselier, Dorien Van den Bossche, Sheeba Santhini Manoharan-Basil, Chris Kenyon","doi":"10.1093/femsle/fnae104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The ResistAZM randomized controlled trial found that the receipt of ceftriaxone/azithromycin, compared to ceftriaxone was not associated with an increase in the proportion of oral commensal Neisseria spp. and streptococci with azithromycin resistance 14 days after treatment. We repeated the analyses by measuring the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of azithromycin and ceftriaxone for individual colonies of commensal Neisseria spp. and streptococci at day 0 and day 14 in both arms. The receipt of ceftriaxone/azithromycin but not ceftriaxone was associated with an increase in azithromycin MIC for both Neisseria spp. (P < 0.0001) and streptococci (P = 0.0076). Likewise, ceftriaxone/azithromycin but not ceftriaxone monotherapy was associated with an increase in ceftriaxone MICs in Neisseria spp. (P = 0.0035). Whereas the proportion method failed to detect an association between the receipt of azithromycin and increased macrolide resistance, the MIC distribution method detected this effect. The MIC distribution method is thus a more sensitive method to assess the effect of antimicrobials on antimicrobial susceptibility.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>The ResistAZM randomized controlled trial found that the receipt of ceftriaxone/azithromycin, compared to ceftriaxone was not associated with an increase in the proportion of oral commensal Neisseria spp. and streptococci with azithromycin resistance 14 days after treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We repeated the analyses by measuring the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of azithromycin and ceftriaxone for individual colonies of commensal Neisseria spp. and streptococci at day 0 and day 14 in both arms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The receipt of ceftriaxone/azithromycin but not ceftriaxone was associated with an increase in azithromycin MIC for both Neisseria spp. (P < 0.0001) and streptococci (P = 0.0076). Likewise, ceftriaxone/azithromycin but not ceftriaxone monotherapy was associated with an increase in ceftriaxone MICs in Neisseria spp. (P = 0.0035).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Whereas the proportion method failed to detect an association between the receipt of azithromycin and increased macrolide resistance, the MIC distribution method detected this effect. The MIC distribution method is thus a more sensitive method to assess the effect of antimicrobials on antimicrobial susceptibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":12214,"journal":{"name":"Fems Microbiology Letters","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fems Microbiology Letters","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnae104","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The ResistAZM randomized controlled trial found that the receipt of ceftriaxone/azithromycin, compared to ceftriaxone was not associated with an increase in the proportion of oral commensal Neisseria spp. and streptococci with azithromycin resistance 14 days after treatment. We repeated the analyses by measuring the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of azithromycin and ceftriaxone for individual colonies of commensal Neisseria spp. and streptococci at day 0 and day 14 in both arms. The receipt of ceftriaxone/azithromycin but not ceftriaxone was associated with an increase in azithromycin MIC for both Neisseria spp. (P < 0.0001) and streptococci (P = 0.0076). Likewise, ceftriaxone/azithromycin but not ceftriaxone monotherapy was associated with an increase in ceftriaxone MICs in Neisseria spp. (P = 0.0035). Whereas the proportion method failed to detect an association between the receipt of azithromycin and increased macrolide resistance, the MIC distribution method detected this effect. The MIC distribution method is thus a more sensitive method to assess the effect of antimicrobials on antimicrobial susceptibility.
Background: The ResistAZM randomized controlled trial found that the receipt of ceftriaxone/azithromycin, compared to ceftriaxone was not associated with an increase in the proportion of oral commensal Neisseria spp. and streptococci with azithromycin resistance 14 days after treatment.
Methods: We repeated the analyses by measuring the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of azithromycin and ceftriaxone for individual colonies of commensal Neisseria spp. and streptococci at day 0 and day 14 in both arms.
Results: The receipt of ceftriaxone/azithromycin but not ceftriaxone was associated with an increase in azithromycin MIC for both Neisseria spp. (P < 0.0001) and streptococci (P = 0.0076). Likewise, ceftriaxone/azithromycin but not ceftriaxone monotherapy was associated with an increase in ceftriaxone MICs in Neisseria spp. (P = 0.0035).
Conclusions: Whereas the proportion method failed to detect an association between the receipt of azithromycin and increased macrolide resistance, the MIC distribution method detected this effect. The MIC distribution method is thus a more sensitive method to assess the effect of antimicrobials on antimicrobial susceptibility.
期刊介绍：
FEMS Microbiology Letters gives priority to concise papers that merit rapid publication by virtue of their originality, general interest and contribution to new developments in microbiology. All aspects of microbiology, including virology, are covered.
2019 Impact Factor: 1.987, Journal Citation Reports (Source Clarivate, 2020)
Ranking: 98/135 (Microbiology)
The journal is divided into eight Sections:
Physiology and Biochemistry (including genetics, molecular biology and ‘omic’ studies)
Food Microbiology (from food production and biotechnology to spoilage and food borne pathogens)
Biotechnology and Synthetic Biology
Pathogens and Pathogenicity (including medical, veterinary, plant and insect pathogens – particularly those relating to food security – with the exception of viruses)
Environmental Microbiology (including ecophysiology, ecogenomics and meta-omic studies)
Virology (viruses infecting any organism, including Bacteria and Archaea)
Taxonomy and Systematics (for publication of novel taxa, taxonomic reclassifications and reviews of a taxonomic nature)
Professional Development (including education, training, CPD, research assessment frameworks, research and publication metrics, best-practice, careers and history of microbiology)
If you are unsure which Section is most appropriate for your manuscript, for example in the case of transdisciplinary studies, we recommend that you contact the Editor-In-Chief by email prior to submission. Our scope includes any type of microorganism - all members of the Bacteria and the Archaea and microbial members of the Eukarya (yeasts, filamentous fungi, microbial algae, protozoa, oomycetes, myxomycetes, etc.) as well as all viruses.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
