In vitro activities of amphotericin B and AmBisome against Aspergillus isolates recovered from Italian patients treated for haematological malignancies

详细信息	查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

• 作者：Camilla Colozza^a ; Brunella Posteraro^b ; Stefania Santilli^a ; Elena De Carolis^b ; Maurizio Sanguinetti^b ; Corrado Girmenia^a ; ^{girmenia@bce.uniroma1.it}
• 关键词：Aspergillus spp. ; Haematological malignancies ; Amphotericin B ; AmBisome ; Susceptibility testing
• 刊名：International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
• 出版年：2012
• 期刊代码：126_09248579
• 类别：med
• 出版时间：May, 2012
• 卷：39
• 期：5
• 页码：440-443
• 文件大小：203 K

摘要

Although there is evidence that liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) is non-inferior to amphotericin B (AmB) in terms of in vivo efficacy, in vitro data regarding the activity of AmBisome against clinical isolates of Aspergillus are rare. In this study, the susceptibilities to AmB and AmBisome of 103 Aspergillus complex isolates (48 Aspergillus flavus, 33 Aspergillus fumigatus, 13 Aspergillus terreus and 9 Aspergillus niger) recovered from haematological patients with invasive infection were compared. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined by the broth microdilution (BMD) method according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), whilst AmB susceptibility was also determined by Etest. Using a susceptible/resistant MIC cut-off of 1 mg/L, all A. fumigatus and A. niger complexes isolates were susceptible to both AmB and AmBisome. In contrast, 38.5%and 30.8%of the A. terreus complex isolates were resistant to AmB and AmBisome, respectively, with good agreement between BMD and Etest methods. With respect to A. flavus complex isolates, 43.7%and 16.7%were resistant by the BMD method to AmBisome and AmB, respectively. For isolates with discrepant results, AmB MICs obtained by Etest were higher than those obtained for AmB by the BMD method and they were closer to those obtained for AmBisome by BMD. Aspergillus flavus AmB MICs ranged from 0.5 mg/L to 2 mg/L by the BMD method and from 1 mg/L to >16 mg/L by the Etest method, and AmBisome MICs ranged from 0.06 mg/L to >16 mg/L by the BMD method. Etest appears to be superior to the CLSI BMD method using AmB in detecting AmB resistance of Aspergillus spp., although the CLSI BMD method might be a suitable procedure if AmBisome is used as the test drug.