Multisite reproducibility of results obtained by two broth dilution methods for susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex

Gail L. Woods, Natalie Williams-Bouyer, Richard J. Wallace, Barbara A. Brown-Elliott, Frank G. Witebsky, Patricia S. Conville, Marianne Plaunt, Geraldine Hall, Priscilla Aralar, Clark Inderlied

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A multicenter study was conducted to assess the interlaboratory reproducibility of susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) by broth microdilution using two different media (cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth with 5% oleic acid-albumin-dextrose-catalase and 7H9 broth with casein) and by macrodilution using the BACTEC 460TB and 12B media at pH 6.8 and 7.3 to 7.4. Ten well-characterized strains of MAC (four macrolide susceptible, six macrolide resistant) were tested against clarithromycin and azithromycin (the latter only by BACTEC 460TB, pH 6.8). At each site, strains were tested against clarithromycin three times on each of three separate days (nine testing events per isolate) by using a common lot of microdilution trays and BACTEC 12B medium, pH 6.8; strains were tested once on three separate days against clarithromycin in 12B medium at pH 7.3 to 7.4 and against azithromycin. Agreement among MICs (i.e., mode ± 1 twofold dilution) was 100% for all strains and both drugs when BACTEC 460TB was used, regardless of the pH of the medium, but varied when microdilution with either medium was used, particularly with susceptible strains. Agreement based on interpretive category, with NCCLS-recommended breakpoints, was 100% for all strains with the BACTEC 460TB method (both drugs and both pH values) and with microdilution using 7H9 broth. With microdilution and Mueller-Hinton broth, agreement by interpretive category was 100% for eight isolates and >90% for two; errors occurred only in laboratories where personnel had minimal experience with this technique. MAC susceptibility testing may be performed by broth macrodilution or microdilution at either pH, with NCCLS-recommended interpretive breakpoints. However, because visual interpretation of broth microdilution end points is subjective, it is more prone to reader error; therefore, this method requires greater expertise than the BACTEC 460TB. Both techniques require appropriate validation and continued documentation of proficiency.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)627-631
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Clinical Microbiology
Volume41
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2003

Fingerprint

Mycobacterium avium Complex
Reproducibility of Results
Clarithromycin
Azithromycin
Macrolides
Laboratory Personnel
Oleic Acid
Caseins
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Documentation
Catalase
Multicenter Studies
Cations
Albumins
Glucose

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)
  • Microbiology

Cite this

Multisite reproducibility of results obtained by two broth dilution methods for susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex. / Woods, Gail L.; Williams-Bouyer, Natalie; Wallace, Richard J.; Brown-Elliott, Barbara A.; Witebsky, Frank G.; Conville, Patricia S.; Plaunt, Marianne; Hall, Geraldine; Aralar, Priscilla; Inderlied, Clark.

In: Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Vol. 41, No. 2, 01.02.2003, p. 627-631.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Woods, GL, Williams-Bouyer, N, Wallace, RJ, Brown-Elliott, BA, Witebsky, FG, Conville, PS, Plaunt, M, Hall, G, Aralar, P & Inderlied, C 2003, 'Multisite reproducibility of results obtained by two broth dilution methods for susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex', Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 627-631. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.41.2.627-631.2003
Woods, Gail L. ; Williams-Bouyer, Natalie ; Wallace, Richard J. ; Brown-Elliott, Barbara A. ; Witebsky, Frank G. ; Conville, Patricia S. ; Plaunt, Marianne ; Hall, Geraldine ; Aralar, Priscilla ; Inderlied, Clark. / Multisite reproducibility of results obtained by two broth dilution methods for susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex. In: Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2003 ; Vol. 41, No. 2. pp. 627-631.
@article{866546f02e3540c99fccf61b3488e02e,
title = "Multisite reproducibility of results obtained by two broth dilution methods for susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex",
abstract = "A multicenter study was conducted to assess the interlaboratory reproducibility of susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) by broth microdilution using two different media (cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth with 5{\%} oleic acid-albumin-dextrose-catalase and 7H9 broth with casein) and by macrodilution using the BACTEC 460TB and 12B media at pH 6.8 and 7.3 to 7.4. Ten well-characterized strains of MAC (four macrolide susceptible, six macrolide resistant) were tested against clarithromycin and azithromycin (the latter only by BACTEC 460TB, pH 6.8). At each site, strains were tested against clarithromycin three times on each of three separate days (nine testing events per isolate) by using a common lot of microdilution trays and BACTEC 12B medium, pH 6.8; strains were tested once on three separate days against clarithromycin in 12B medium at pH 7.3 to 7.4 and against azithromycin. Agreement among MICs (i.e., mode ± 1 twofold dilution) was 100{\%} for all strains and both drugs when BACTEC 460TB was used, regardless of the pH of the medium, but varied when microdilution with either medium was used, particularly with susceptible strains. Agreement based on interpretive category, with NCCLS-recommended breakpoints, was 100{\%} for all strains with the BACTEC 460TB method (both drugs and both pH values) and with microdilution using 7H9 broth. With microdilution and Mueller-Hinton broth, agreement by interpretive category was 100{\%} for eight isolates and >90{\%} for two; errors occurred only in laboratories where personnel had minimal experience with this technique. MAC susceptibility testing may be performed by broth macrodilution or microdilution at either pH, with NCCLS-recommended interpretive breakpoints. However, because visual interpretation of broth microdilution end points is subjective, it is more prone to reader error; therefore, this method requires greater expertise than the BACTEC 460TB. Both techniques require appropriate validation and continued documentation of proficiency.",
author = "Woods, {Gail L.} and Natalie Williams-Bouyer and Wallace, {Richard J.} and Brown-Elliott, {Barbara A.} and Witebsky, {Frank G.} and Conville, {Patricia S.} and Marianne Plaunt and Geraldine Hall and Priscilla Aralar and Clark Inderlied",
year = "2003",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1128/JCM.41.2.627-631.2003",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "41",
pages = "627--631",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Microbiology",
issn = "0095-1137",
publisher = "American Society for Microbiology",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multisite reproducibility of results obtained by two broth dilution methods for susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex

AU - Woods, Gail L.

AU - Williams-Bouyer, Natalie

AU - Wallace, Richard J.

AU - Brown-Elliott, Barbara A.

AU - Witebsky, Frank G.

AU - Conville, Patricia S.

AU - Plaunt, Marianne

AU - Hall, Geraldine

AU - Aralar, Priscilla

AU - Inderlied, Clark

PY - 2003/2/1

Y1 - 2003/2/1

N2 - A multicenter study was conducted to assess the interlaboratory reproducibility of susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) by broth microdilution using two different media (cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth with 5% oleic acid-albumin-dextrose-catalase and 7H9 broth with casein) and by macrodilution using the BACTEC 460TB and 12B media at pH 6.8 and 7.3 to 7.4. Ten well-characterized strains of MAC (four macrolide susceptible, six macrolide resistant) were tested against clarithromycin and azithromycin (the latter only by BACTEC 460TB, pH 6.8). At each site, strains were tested against clarithromycin three times on each of three separate days (nine testing events per isolate) by using a common lot of microdilution trays and BACTEC 12B medium, pH 6.8; strains were tested once on three separate days against clarithromycin in 12B medium at pH 7.3 to 7.4 and against azithromycin. Agreement among MICs (i.e., mode ± 1 twofold dilution) was 100% for all strains and both drugs when BACTEC 460TB was used, regardless of the pH of the medium, but varied when microdilution with either medium was used, particularly with susceptible strains. Agreement based on interpretive category, with NCCLS-recommended breakpoints, was 100% for all strains with the BACTEC 460TB method (both drugs and both pH values) and with microdilution using 7H9 broth. With microdilution and Mueller-Hinton broth, agreement by interpretive category was 100% for eight isolates and >90% for two; errors occurred only in laboratories where personnel had minimal experience with this technique. MAC susceptibility testing may be performed by broth macrodilution or microdilution at either pH, with NCCLS-recommended interpretive breakpoints. However, because visual interpretation of broth microdilution end points is subjective, it is more prone to reader error; therefore, this method requires greater expertise than the BACTEC 460TB. Both techniques require appropriate validation and continued documentation of proficiency.

AB - A multicenter study was conducted to assess the interlaboratory reproducibility of susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) by broth microdilution using two different media (cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth with 5% oleic acid-albumin-dextrose-catalase and 7H9 broth with casein) and by macrodilution using the BACTEC 460TB and 12B media at pH 6.8 and 7.3 to 7.4. Ten well-characterized strains of MAC (four macrolide susceptible, six macrolide resistant) were tested against clarithromycin and azithromycin (the latter only by BACTEC 460TB, pH 6.8). At each site, strains were tested against clarithromycin three times on each of three separate days (nine testing events per isolate) by using a common lot of microdilution trays and BACTEC 12B medium, pH 6.8; strains were tested once on three separate days against clarithromycin in 12B medium at pH 7.3 to 7.4 and against azithromycin. Agreement among MICs (i.e., mode ± 1 twofold dilution) was 100% for all strains and both drugs when BACTEC 460TB was used, regardless of the pH of the medium, but varied when microdilution with either medium was used, particularly with susceptible strains. Agreement based on interpretive category, with NCCLS-recommended breakpoints, was 100% for all strains with the BACTEC 460TB method (both drugs and both pH values) and with microdilution using 7H9 broth. With microdilution and Mueller-Hinton broth, agreement by interpretive category was 100% for eight isolates and >90% for two; errors occurred only in laboratories where personnel had minimal experience with this technique. MAC susceptibility testing may be performed by broth macrodilution or microdilution at either pH, with NCCLS-recommended interpretive breakpoints. However, because visual interpretation of broth microdilution end points is subjective, it is more prone to reader error; therefore, this method requires greater expertise than the BACTEC 460TB. Both techniques require appropriate validation and continued documentation of proficiency.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=12244307853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=12244307853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1128/JCM.41.2.627-631.2003

DO - 10.1128/JCM.41.2.627-631.2003

M3 - Article

C2 - 12574258

AN - SCOPUS:12244307853

VL - 41

SP - 627

EP - 631

JO - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

SN - 0095-1137

IS - 2

ER -