Commercially available tests for determining cefiderocol susceptibility display variable performance in the Achromobacter genus

Abstract

BackgroundCefiderocol is a siderophore-conjugated cephalosporin increasingly used in the management of Achromobacter infections. Testing for cefiderocol susceptibility is challenging with distinct recommendations depending on the pathogens.ObjectivesWe evaluated the performance of commercial tests for testing cefiderocol susceptibility in the Achromobacter genus and reviewed the literature.MethodsDiffusion (disks, MIC gradient test strips [MTS], Liofilchem) and broth microdilution (BMD) methods (ComASP™, Liofilchem; UMIC®, Bruker) were compared with the BMD reference method according to the EUCAST guidelines on 143 Achromobacter strains from 14 species with MIC50/90 of ≤ 0.015/0.5 mg/L. A literature search was conducted regardless of method or species.ResultsNone of the methods tested fulfilled an acceptable essential agreement (EA). MTS displayed the lowest EA (30.8%) after UMIC® (49%) and ComASP™ (76.9%). All methods achieved an acceptable bias, with MICs either underestimated using MTS (-1.3%) and ComASP™ (-14.2%) or overestimated with UMIC® (+ 9.1%). Inhibition zone diameters ranged from 6 to 38 mm (IZD50/90=33/30 mm). UMIC® and ComASP™ failed to categorize one or the two cefiderocol-resistant strains of this study as resistant unlike the diffusion-based methods. The literature review highlighted distinct performance of the available methods according to pathogens and testing conditions.ConclusionsThe use of MTS is discouraged for Achromobacter spp. Disk diffusion can be used to screen for susceptible strains by setting a threshold diameter of 30 mm. UMIC® and ComASP™ should not be used as the sole method but have to be systematically associated with disk diffusion to detect the yet rarely described cefiderocol-resistant Achromobacter sp. strains.