Cargando…
701. Comparison of MIC Results for Gepotidacin by Agar Dilution and Broth Microdilution Methods
BACKGROUND: Gepotidacin (GSK2140944) is a novel triazaacenaphthylene bacterial type II topoisomerase inhibitor in clinical development for the treatment of gonorrhea and uncomplicated UTI (acute cystitis). Gepotidacin selectively inhibits bacterial DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV by a unique mechani...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6811067/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.769 |
_version_ | 1783462389204647936 |
---|---|
author | Arends, S J Ryan Canino, Michele A Roth, Brieanna M Rhomberg, Paul R Flamm, Robert K Scangarella-Oman, Nicole |
author_facet | Arends, S J Ryan Canino, Michele A Roth, Brieanna M Rhomberg, Paul R Flamm, Robert K Scangarella-Oman, Nicole |
author_sort | Arends, S J Ryan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Gepotidacin (GSK2140944) is a novel triazaacenaphthylene bacterial type II topoisomerase inhibitor in clinical development for the treatment of gonorrhea and uncomplicated UTI (acute cystitis). Gepotidacin selectively inhibits bacterial DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV by a unique mechanism not utilized by any currently approved therapeutic agent and demonstrates in vitro activity against most target pathogens resistant to established antibacterials, including fluoroquinolones. This study tested the equivalency of minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) obtained by 2 reference susceptibility testing methods, agar dilution (AD) and broth microdilution (BMD), for gepotidacin against Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms. METHODS: Susceptibility testing for both methods was performed on a total of 733 clinical isolates recovered largely in 2016 from over 120 medical centers worldwide. For N. gonorrhoeae, only the AD method is recommended by CLSI, therefore BMD was performed using Fastidious Broth for comparison purposes. Essential agreement (EA) based on evaluable results was calculated as the number of isolates with MICs within one 2-fold dilution of the reference method divided by the total number of results. Equivalency was defined using the 95% criteria from the FDA’s class II controls document. RESULTS: The EA observed for gepotidacin with these 2 methods was 85.8% overall and 98.3% when H. influenzae and N. gonorrhoeae isolates were excluded. Slightly higher gepotidacin MICs were observed when tested by BMD for each of these species/groups; this trend was especially prominent for E. coli and S. pyogenes. Gepotidacin tested against H. influenzae (73.1%) or N. gonorrhoeae (28.6%) species had much lower EAs. CONCLUSION: Equivalency (EA >95%) was established between AD and BMD methods for determining gepotidacin susceptibility results against Staphylococcus spp., Streptococcus spp. and E. coli. However, for N. gonorrhoeae and H. influenzae, equivalency between the 2 methods was not established; therefore, future antimicrobial susceptibility testing for gepotidacin against these organisms should adhere to the methods for which quality control ranges and breakpoints are approved. [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6811067 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68110672019-10-28 701. Comparison of MIC Results for Gepotidacin by Agar Dilution and Broth Microdilution Methods Arends, S J Ryan Canino, Michele A Roth, Brieanna M Rhomberg, Paul R Flamm, Robert K Scangarella-Oman, Nicole Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Gepotidacin (GSK2140944) is a novel triazaacenaphthylene bacterial type II topoisomerase inhibitor in clinical development for the treatment of gonorrhea and uncomplicated UTI (acute cystitis). Gepotidacin selectively inhibits bacterial DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV by a unique mechanism not utilized by any currently approved therapeutic agent and demonstrates in vitro activity against most target pathogens resistant to established antibacterials, including fluoroquinolones. This study tested the equivalency of minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) obtained by 2 reference susceptibility testing methods, agar dilution (AD) and broth microdilution (BMD), for gepotidacin against Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms. METHODS: Susceptibility testing for both methods was performed on a total of 733 clinical isolates recovered largely in 2016 from over 120 medical centers worldwide. For N. gonorrhoeae, only the AD method is recommended by CLSI, therefore BMD was performed using Fastidious Broth for comparison purposes. Essential agreement (EA) based on evaluable results was calculated as the number of isolates with MICs within one 2-fold dilution of the reference method divided by the total number of results. Equivalency was defined using the 95% criteria from the FDA’s class II controls document. RESULTS: The EA observed for gepotidacin with these 2 methods was 85.8% overall and 98.3% when H. influenzae and N. gonorrhoeae isolates were excluded. Slightly higher gepotidacin MICs were observed when tested by BMD for each of these species/groups; this trend was especially prominent for E. coli and S. pyogenes. Gepotidacin tested against H. influenzae (73.1%) or N. gonorrhoeae (28.6%) species had much lower EAs. CONCLUSION: Equivalency (EA >95%) was established between AD and BMD methods for determining gepotidacin susceptibility results against Staphylococcus spp., Streptococcus spp. and E. coli. However, for N. gonorrhoeae and H. influenzae, equivalency between the 2 methods was not established; therefore, future antimicrobial susceptibility testing for gepotidacin against these organisms should adhere to the methods for which quality control ranges and breakpoints are approved. [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6811067/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.769 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Abstracts Arends, S J Ryan Canino, Michele A Roth, Brieanna M Rhomberg, Paul R Flamm, Robert K Scangarella-Oman, Nicole 701. Comparison of MIC Results for Gepotidacin by Agar Dilution and Broth Microdilution Methods |
title | 701. Comparison of MIC Results for Gepotidacin by Agar Dilution and Broth Microdilution Methods |
title_full | 701. Comparison of MIC Results for Gepotidacin by Agar Dilution and Broth Microdilution Methods |
title_fullStr | 701. Comparison of MIC Results for Gepotidacin by Agar Dilution and Broth Microdilution Methods |
title_full_unstemmed | 701. Comparison of MIC Results for Gepotidacin by Agar Dilution and Broth Microdilution Methods |
title_short | 701. Comparison of MIC Results for Gepotidacin by Agar Dilution and Broth Microdilution Methods |
title_sort | 701. comparison of mic results for gepotidacin by agar dilution and broth microdilution methods |
topic | Abstracts |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6811067/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.769 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT arendssjryan 701comparisonofmicresultsforgepotidacinbyagardilutionandbrothmicrodilutionmethods AT caninomichelea 701comparisonofmicresultsforgepotidacinbyagardilutionandbrothmicrodilutionmethods AT rothbrieannam 701comparisonofmicresultsforgepotidacinbyagardilutionandbrothmicrodilutionmethods AT rhombergpaulr 701comparisonofmicresultsforgepotidacinbyagardilutionandbrothmicrodilutionmethods AT flammrobertk 701comparisonofmicresultsforgepotidacinbyagardilutionandbrothmicrodilutionmethods AT scangarellaomannicole 701comparisonofmicresultsforgepotidacinbyagardilutionandbrothmicrodilutionmethods |