Implications of Intravenous and Inhaled Amikacin Breakpoint Reporting for Mycobacterium avium Complex Pulmonary Isolates.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 MICROBIOLOGY
Christian M Gill, Robin Chamberland, Getahun Abate
{"title":"Implications of Intravenous and Inhaled Amikacin Breakpoint Reporting for <i>Mycobacterium avium</i> Complex Pulmonary Isolates.","authors":"Christian M Gill, Robin Chamberland, Getahun Abate","doi":"10.3390/pathogens14060583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The treatment of <i>Mycobacterium avium</i> complex (MAC) remains a clinical challenge as multidrug regimens are needed and may be limited by treatment-related toxicity. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) endorses breakpoints for several agents used for MAC infection treatment. Amikacin has distinct breakpoints for intravenous (IV) therapy and inhaled therapy using amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS) for MAC pulmonary disease. The purpose of the present retrospective cohort study of MAC pulmonary isolates was to assess the number of amikacin non-susceptible isolates by the IV breakpoints that remain susceptible to the inhaled breakpoints. One isolate per patient per year was assessed and susceptibility was described for amikacin IV, amikacin inhaled, clarithromycin, moxifloxacin, and linezolid per the CLSI. Of the 218 isolates, 94% [204/218] tested as susceptible to amikacin per the IV breakpoints compared with 99.5% [217/218] to the inhaled breakpoints. Of the amikacin IV non-susceptible isolates, 93% [13/14] were susceptible by the inhaled breakpoints. For comparison, clarithromycin was the next most active agent followed by moxifloxacin and linezolid with 97% [211/218], 82% [178/218], and 66% [143/218] of isolates testing as susceptible to each, respectively. These data highlight the importance of laboratories to report both the IV and inhaled amikacin interpretive criteria so that clinicians do not disregard potential therapeutic options for the treatment of MAC pulmonary disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":19758,"journal":{"name":"Pathogens","volume":"14 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12195776/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pathogens","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14060583","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The treatment of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) remains a clinical challenge as multidrug regimens are needed and may be limited by treatment-related toxicity. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) endorses breakpoints for several agents used for MAC infection treatment. Amikacin has distinct breakpoints for intravenous (IV) therapy and inhaled therapy using amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS) for MAC pulmonary disease. The purpose of the present retrospective cohort study of MAC pulmonary isolates was to assess the number of amikacin non-susceptible isolates by the IV breakpoints that remain susceptible to the inhaled breakpoints. One isolate per patient per year was assessed and susceptibility was described for amikacin IV, amikacin inhaled, clarithromycin, moxifloxacin, and linezolid per the CLSI. Of the 218 isolates, 94% [204/218] tested as susceptible to amikacin per the IV breakpoints compared with 99.5% [217/218] to the inhaled breakpoints. Of the amikacin IV non-susceptible isolates, 93% [13/14] were susceptible by the inhaled breakpoints. For comparison, clarithromycin was the next most active agent followed by moxifloxacin and linezolid with 97% [211/218], 82% [178/218], and 66% [143/218] of isolates testing as susceptible to each, respectively. These data highlight the importance of laboratories to report both the IV and inhaled amikacin interpretive criteria so that clinicians do not disregard potential therapeutic options for the treatment of MAC pulmonary disease.

静脉和吸入阿米卡星断点报告对禽分枝杆菌复合体肺部分离株的意义。
鸟分枝杆菌复合体(MAC)的治疗仍然是一个临床挑战,因为需要多药方案,并且可能受到治疗相关毒性的限制。临床和实验室标准协会(CLSI)认可用于MAC感染治疗的几种药物的断点。阿米卡星在静脉(IV)治疗和使用阿米卡星脂质体吸入混悬液(ALIS)治疗MAC肺部疾病时具有明显的断点。本研究对MAC肺部分离株进行回顾性队列研究,目的是通过静脉断点评估对吸入断点敏感的阿米卡星非敏感分离株的数量。每位患者每年评估一个分离株,并根据CLSI描述对阿米卡星IV、吸入阿米卡星、克拉霉素、莫西沙星和利奈唑胺的敏感性。218株分离株中,94%[204/218]按静脉注射断点检测为阿米卡星敏感,而99.5%[217/218]按吸入断点检测为阿米卡星敏感。吸入断点对阿米卡星IV不敏感的分离株有93%[13/14]敏感。比较而言,克拉霉素的活性次之,莫西沙星和利奈唑胺的敏感性分别为97%[211/218]、82%[178/218]和66%[143/218]。这些数据强调了实验室报告静脉注射和吸入阿米卡星解释标准的重要性,这样临床医生就不会忽视治疗MAC肺部疾病的潜在治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pathogens
Pathogens Medicine-Immunology and Allergy
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
8.10%
发文量
1285
审稿时长
17.75 days
期刊介绍: Pathogens (ISSN 2076-0817) publishes reviews, regular research papers and short notes on all aspects of pathogens and pathogen-host interactions. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental and/or methodical details must be provided for research articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信