JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, June 2009, p. 1902–1905 0095-1137/09/$08.00⫹0 doi:10.1128/JCM.02304-08 Copyright © 2009, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Vol. 47, No. 6
Correlation of Cefoxitin MICs with the Presence of mecA in Staphylococcus spp.䌤 Jana M. Swenson,1* William B. Brasso,2 Mary Jane Ferraro,3 Dwight J. Hardy,4 Cynthia C. Knapp,5 David Lonsway,1 Sigrid McAllister,1 L. Barth Reller,6 Helio S. Sader,7 Dee Shortridge,8 Robert Skov,9 Melvin P. Weinstein,10 Barbara L. Zimmer,11 and Jean B. Patel1 Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 303331; BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, Maryland 211522; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 021143; University of Rochester Medical Center Hospital, Rochester, New York 146424; Trek Diagnostic Systems, Cleveland, Ohio 441315; Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 277106; JMI Laboratories, North Liberty, Iowa 523177; bioMe´rieux, Inc., Hazelwood, Missouri 630428; Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen 2300, Denmark9; Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey 0890310; and Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics MicroScan, West Sacramento, California 9569111 Received 1 December 2008/Returned for modification 3 February 2009/Accepted 26 March 2009
This report describes the results of an 11-laboratory study to determine if a cefoxitin broth microdilution MIC test could predict the presence of mecA in staphylococci. Using breakpoints of 6 or 8 g/ml for mecA-positive isolates, sensitivity and specificity based on mecA or presumed mecA for Staphylococcus aureus at 18 h of incubation were 99.7 to 100% in three cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broths tested. For coagulase-negative strains at 24 h of incubation, breakpoints of 4 g/ml for mecA-positive isolates gave sensitivity and specificity of 94 to 99% and 69 to 80%, respectively. NY; Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ; Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark; and Trek Diagnostic Systems, Cleveland, OH. Each laboratory tested approximately 50 unique clinical isolates from their own collection (30 Staphylococcus aureus isolates and 20 coagulase-negative staphylococci [CoNS]) and quality control strains for each test day (S. aureus ATCC 29213 [tested by MIC only] and S. aureus ATCC 25923 [tested by disk diffusion only]). Additional strains were tested at the CDC, totaling 167 S. aureus isolates and 22 CoNS. The total number of strains tested in all labs was 479 S. aureus isolates and 204 CoNS. All results were read after both 18-h and 24-h incubations. Endpoints were read as the lowest concentration at which no visible growth was observed. At 18 h of incubation, 97.3% of the MIC quality control results (for S. aureus ATCC 29213) and 97.9% of the disk diffusion quality control results (for S. aureus ATCC 25923) were within the range considered acceptable by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). After testing, all strains were shipped to the CDC for further analysis. PCR testing for mecA was performed as previously described (8) on the following strains: (i) any S. aureus strain for which the cefoxitin MIC was ⬍16 g/ml in any of the three media tested (n ⫽ 180); (ii) any S. aureus strain for which the cefoxitin MIC was ⬎8 g/ml and the oxacillin MIC was ⬍4 g/ml in any of the three media tested (n ⫽ 5); and (iii) a sample of the 304 isolates (n ⫽ 16 [5%]) for which the cefoxitin MIC was ⬎8 g/ml and the oxacillin MIC was ⬎2 g/ml. All other S. aureus strains for which the cefoxitin MIC was ⬎8 g/ml and the oxacillin MIC was ⬎2 g/ml at 24 h of incubation were presumed to be mecA positive. All CoNS were tested by PCR for the presence of mecA and identified to species level by using previously described methods (1). For the purposes of
The use of a cefoxitin disk test to detect staphylococci that are likely to contain the mecA gene has been widely advocated since the test was first suggested (3, 6) and has been adopted by antimicrobial susceptibility testing organizations worldwide (http://www.bsac.org.uk/_db/_documents/version_6.1.pdf, http: //www.srga.org/, http://www.clsi.org/). For laboratories that do not use disk diffusion as their primary testing method, performing disk diffusion requires additional expense and reagents. Consequently, we performed studies to determine if a cefoxitin broth microdilution MIC breakpoint would correlate with the presence of the mecA gene in staphylococci. Cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broths (CAMHB) from three manufacturers (BBL, BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, MD; Difco, BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, MD; and Oxoid, Basingstoke, Hampshire, England) (cation content adjusted if necessary), were used to prepare frozen microdilution panels containing cefoxitin concentrations of 0.5 to 32 g/ml (including 6 g/ml) and oxacillin concentrations of 0.06 to 16 g/ml (in BBL CAMHB only). The frozen panels were shipped to all participants, along with 30-g cefoxitin disks (BBL). Each laboratory used its current lot of Mueller-Hinton agar for disk diffusion testing. Participating laboratories included the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA; BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, MD; bioMe´rieux, Inc., Hazelwood, MO; Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC; JMI Labs, North Liberty, IA; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics MicroScan, Inc., West Sacramento, CA; University of Rochester, Rochester,
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Mailstop G08, 1600 Clifton Rd., Atlanta, GA 30333. Phone: (404) 639-0196. Fax: (404) 639-1381. E-mail:
[email protected]. 䌤 Published ahead of print on 8 April 2009. 1902
VOL. 47, 2009
NOTES
1903
TABLE 1. Cefoxitin MICs for 479 isolates of Staphylococcus aureus tested in three different CAMHBa Isolate
Incubation time (h)
mecA positive (n ⫽ 312)b
18 24
mecA negative (n ⫽ 167)
18 24
a b c
No. of isolates with cefoxitin MIC (g/ml) of: CAMHB
ⱕ0.5
BBL Difco Oxoid BBL Difco Oxoid BBL Difco Oxoid BBL Difco Oxoid
1
2
4
1 1 4
1 4 2 1 1 1
3
93 93 102 80 73 84
69 69 63 83 92 81
6
8
16
32
⬎32
2 6 9 1 3 5
8 10 8 3 10 8
38 110 101 24 70 71
146 124 127 129 142 141
117 62 67 154 87 87
1 1 1
No. (%) of correct resultsc
311 (99.7) 312 (100) 312 (100) 311 (99.7) 312 (100) 312 (100) 167 (100) 166 (99.4) 167 (100) 167 (100) 166 (99.4) 166 (99.4)
Included five strains of Staphylococcus lugdunensis. mecA determined by PCR if cefoxitin MIC is ⱕ8 g/ml or if cefoxitin MIC is ⬎8 g/ml and oxacillin MIC is ⬍4 g/ml; others were presumed to be mecA positive. Results are considered correct for mecA-positive strains if MICs are ⱖ6 g/ml; results are considered correct for mecA-negative strains if MICs are ⱕ4 g/ml.
data analysis, mecA or presumed mecA was used as the gold standard. Cefoxitin MIC results for the S. aureus group (which included eight isolates of Staphylococcus lugdunensis) showed a clear separation of mecA-positive and mecA-negative strains between 4 and 6 g/ml; most isolates with cefoxitin MICs of 6 g/ml contained the mecA gene (Table 1). Among 13 strains for which the cefoxitin MIC was 6 g/ml in any medium at either incubation time period, 11 were mecA positive. All the S. lugdunensis strains tested were mecA negative and had cefoxitin MICs of ⱕ4 g/ml. Using a cefoxitin breakpoint of ⱕ4 g/ml for oxacillin-susceptible or mecA-negative isolates and that of ⱖ8 g/ml (rounding 6 g/ml up to 8 g/ml) for oxacillin-resistant or mecA-positive isolates, sensitivity and specificity were excellent, 99.7 to 100%. If these breakpoints are applied to the isolate population in this study, there are some category discrepancies between cefoxitin susceptibility testing and oxacillin susceptibility testing. These were limited to isolates for which the cefoxitin MIC was ⱖ6 g/ml and oxacillin MIC was ⬍4 g/ml. The number of isolates varied depending on the medium and time of incubation, with the lowest being three strains at 24 h in BBL CAMHB and the highest being seven strains at 18 h in Difco CAMHB. All were mecA positive
except for two isolates. For the mecA-positive isolates, the oxacillin MICs were 1 or 2 g/ml, and the cefoxitin MICs ranged from 6 to ⬎32 g/ml. The sensitivity and specificity of cefoxitin disk diffusion testing in this study were also excellent, 99.7 and 100%, respectively (data not shown). These results are similar to those from a previous study when cefoxitin MIC testing was done to determine cefoxitin disk diffusion breakpoints (9). In that 10-laboratory study using panels prepared with CAMHB of two manufacturers and the MIC breakpoints proposed here, the sensitivity was 98 to 99%, and specificity was 99 to 100% (9). Cefoxitin MIC results for CoNS showed no clear separation of mecA-positive and -negative strains (Table 2). However, test sensitivity using breakpoints of ⱕ2 g/ml and ⱖ4 g/ml differed substantially between the media used, as follows: ⱖ99% at both 18 h and 24 h for Difco and Oxoid CAMHB, but only 89% at 18 h and 94% at 24 h for BBL CAMHB. However, specificity for all media at both times was ⱕ80%. Comparing the performance for CoNS grouped by Staphylococcus epidermidis versus non-S. epidermidis isolates (Table 3), sensitivities were similar for both organisms groups (at 24 h, 94 to 99% for S. epidermidis and 91 to 100% for non-S. epi-
TABLE 2. Cefoxitin MICs for 203 CoNS tested in three different CAMHB Isolate
mecA positive (n ⫽ 131)a
Incubation time (h)
18 24
mecA negative (n ⫽ 73)
18 24
a b
No. of isolates with cefoxitin MIC (g/ml) of: CAMHB
BBL Difco Oxoid BBL Difco Oxoid BBL Difco Oxoid BBL Difco Oxoid
ⱕ0.5
1
2
4
6
8
16
32
⬎32
8
2
2
3
6 16 11 5 16 8 7 6 7 6 5 6
13 3 15 13 4 17 2 1
7 23 18 13 28 28
41 34 30 44 39 35
21 11 7 17 8 6
11 14 15 13 9 11 6 10 11 6 10 15
36 39 41 33 33 31
10 2
6 2 1 4 2 1 27 42 47 32 45 44
9 2
3 2 1
1 1 1 1
No. (%) of correct resultsb
115 (88.5) 129 (98.5) 130 (99.2) 122 (93.8) 129 (98.5) 130 (99.2) 58 (79.5) 55 (75.3) 54 (74.0) 58 (79.5) 55 (75.3) 50 (68.5)
The number of isolates in BBL CAMHB was 130. Results are considered correct for mecA-positive strains if MICs are ⱖ4 g/ml; results are considered correct for mecA-negative strains if MICs are ⱕ2 g/ml.
1904
NOTES
J. CLIN. MICROBIOL.
TABLE 3. Comparison of sensitivity and specificity of cefoxitin MICs of ⱕ2 g/ml for mecA negativity and ⱖ4 g/ml for mecA positivity for three groups Groupc
CoNS S. epidermidis Non-S. epidermidis
CAMHB
BBL Difco Oxoid BBL Difco Oxoid BBL Difco Oxoid
Sensitivity (%) ata:
Specificity (%) atb:
18 h
24 h
18 h
24 h
89 99 99 88 99 99 86 97 100
94 99 99 94 99 99 91 97 100
80 75 74 91 91 88 69 62 62
80 75 69 91 91 85 69 62 54
a Sensitivity values are the percentage of mecA-positive results with cefoxitin MICs of ⱖ4 g/ml. Values in boldface type are ⬎90%. b Specificity values are the percentage of mecA-negative results with cefoxitin MICs of ⱕ2 g/ml. Values in boldface type are ⬎90%. c mecA status for each group was as follows: 131 mecA-positive and 73 mecAnegative CoNS; 95 mecA-positive and 34 mecA-negative S. epidermidis isolates; and 36 mecA-positive and 39 mecA-negative non-S. epidermidis isolates. The number of mecA-positive CoNS in BBL CAMHB was 130.
dermidis). However, the specificity of the test was much better for S. epidermidis than that for non-S. epidermidis isolates (at 24 h, 85 to 91% for S. epidermidis versus 54 to 69% for non-S. epidermidis). Although the performance of the cefoxitin MIC test in this study for the prediction of mecA in CoNS is not ideal, its use might be considered if its performance were no worse than that of the oxacillin MIC test. Although our results and those from the previous CLSI study (9) showed that the two tests to have similar sensitivities (Table 4), the specificity of cefoxitin (69 to 90%) was not as good as that of oxacillin (89 to 91%). For many laboratories, the cefoxitin MIC test can be incorporated into routine testing of S. aureus when the drug is included in panels of automated antimicrobial susceptibility testing systems. Several automated susceptibility testing manufacturers have begun using cefoxitin MICs to predict mecA-mediated resistance in Staphylococcus spp. In a recent report, the cefoxitin MIC was a better predictor of mecA-mediated resistance in CoNS than is reported here (4). However, performance differences among commercial systems may reflect difference in the systems’ use of both oxacillin and cefoxitin data as well as the ability of device manufacturers to use a single-source optimized medium, whereas a reference method needs to work in media from multiple manufacturers. Recently, two groups of investigators demonstrated that moxalactam may be a better indicator of mecA in CoNS than is cefoxitin. One group recommended the use of a combination of oxacillin MIC and moxalactam MIC tests (7); the other recommended the use of a combination of cefoxitin disk and moxalactam disk tests (5). The use of moxalactam tests in combination with cefoxitin and/or oxacillin tests to predict the mecA status of CoNS may deserve further study, given that the use of cefoxitin MICs alone is not optimal for this purpose. In summary, in an 11-laboratory study, we found that cefoxitin broth microdilution breakpoints of ⱕ4 g/ml for the pre-
TABLE 4. Comparison of sensitivity and specificity of oxacillin and cefoxitin MICs for prediction of mecA presence in CoNS read at 24 h in two CLSI studies Sensitivity (%) in thea:
Specificity (%) in theb:
Antimicrobial
CAMHB
2004 study (n ⫽ 126)d
2007 study (n ⫽ 131)c
2004 study (n ⫽ 70)
2007 study (n ⫽ 72)
Oxacillin
BBL Difco BBL Difco Oxoid
95 99 97 100
95
89 91 90 84
89
Cefoxitin
93 99 99
80 75 69
a Sensitivity values are the percentage of mecA-positive results with cefoxitin MICs of ⱖ4 g/ml. b Specificity values are the percentage of mecA-negative results with cefoxitin MICs of ⱕ2 g/ml. c Current study. The number of mecA-positive isolates in BBL CAMHB was 130. d Study by Swenson et al. (9).
diction of mecA-negative results and those of ⱖ6 or 8 g/ml for mecA-positive results in S. aureus isolates read at 18 h of incubation were highly sensitive and specific. These breakpoints for S. aureus were approved by the CLSI Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing and were included in the M100-S18 tables published in January 2008 (2). For CoNS, we found that cefoxitin MIC levels were sensitive but not specific in identifying the presence of mecA and, thus, recommend that they not replace oxacillin MICs at this time. We thank all those who performed the technical work for this study: Tracey Gill and John P. Douglass (BD Diagnostic Systems); Jean Spargo (Massachusetts General Hospital); David Vicino (University of Rochester Medical Center); Amy Miskov, Nikki Holliday, and Scott Killian (Trek Diagnostic Systems); Stanley Mirrett, Dolores H. Calley, and Hina S. Patel (Duke University Hospital); Doug Biedenbach and Ron N. Jones (JMI Laboratories); Rita Griffith (bioMe´rieux, Inc.); Frank Hansen (Statens Serum Institut); Judy Rothberg (Robert Wood Johnson Medical School); and Linda Van Pelt and Guadalupe Mendoza-Morales (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics MicroScan). The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. REFERENCES 1. Bannerman, T. L., and S. J. Peacock. 2007. Staphylococcus, Micrococcus and other catalase-positive cocci. In P. R. Murray, E. J. Baron, J. H. Jorgensen, M. L. Landry, and M. A. Pfaller (ed.), Manual of clinical microbiology, 9th ed., vol. 1. ASM Press, Washington, DC. 2. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute/NCCLS. 2008. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 18th informational supplement. CLSI document M100-S18. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA. 3. Felten, A., B. Grandry, P. H. Lagrange, and I. Casin. 2002. Evaluation of three techniques for detection of low-level methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): a disk diffusion method with cefoxitin and moxalactam, the Vitek 2 system, and the MRSA-screen latex agglutination test. J. Clin. Microbiol. 40:2766–2771. 4. Hindler, J., K. Ward, D. Buckner, L. B. Reller, P. C. Schreckenberger, J. Tjhio, K. Sei, and L. M. Mann. 2008. Multicenter evaluation of a MicroScan dried overnight cefoxitin screen in combination with oxacillin MIC results for detection of -lactam resistance in staphylococci, abstr. C-015, Abstr. 108th Gen. Meet. Am. Soc. Microbiol. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC. 5. Join-Lambert, O. F., S. Clauser, C. Guillet, J.-P. Jais, E. Abachin, G. Quesnes, E. Carbonnelle, A. Le Monnier, J.-R. Zahar, S. Kayal, P. Berche, and A. Ferroni. 2007. Comparison of cefoxitin and moxalactam 30 g disc diffusion methods for detection of methicillin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 59:763–766. 6. Mougeot, C., J. Guillaumat-Taillet, and J. M. Libert. 2001. Staphylococcus
VOL. 47, 2009 aureus: nouvelle de´tection de la resistance intrinseque par la methode de diffusion. Pathol. Biol. 49:199–204. 7. Pupin, H., H. Renaudin, O. Join-Lambert, C. Bebear, F. Megraud, and P. Lehours. 2007. Evaluation of moxalactam with the BD Phoenix system for detection of methicillin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci. J. Clin. Microbiol. 45:2005–2008. 8. Swenson, J. M., D. Lonsway, S. McAllister, A. Thompson, L. Jevitt, W.
NOTES
1905
Zhu, and J. B. Patel. 2007. Detection of mecA-mediated resistance using reference and commercial testing methods in a collection of Staphylococcus aureus expressing borderline oxacillin MICs. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 58:33–39. 9. Swenson, J. M., F. C. Tenover, et al. 2005. Results of disk diffusion testing with cefoxitin correlate with presence of mecA in Staphylococcus spp. J. Clin. Microbiol. 43:3818–3823.
