Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, December 2007, p. 3954-3957, Vol. 45, No. 12
0095-1137/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JCM.01501-07
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Detection of Inducible Clindamycin Resistance in Staphylococci by Broth Microdilution Using Erythromycin-Clindamycin Combination Wells
Jana M. Swenson,1*
William B. Brasso,2
Mary Jane Ferraro,3
Dwight J. Hardy,4
Cynthia C. Knapp,5
Linda K. McDougal,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
Antimicrobial Resistance Team, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333,1
BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, Maryland 21152,2
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02114,3
University of Rochester Medical Center Hospital, Rochester, New York 14642,4
Trek Diagnostic Systems, Cleveland, Ohio 44131,5
Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina 27710,6
JMI Laboratories, North Liberty, Iowa 52317,7
BioMérieux, Inc., Hazelwood, Missouri 63042,8
Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark 2300,9
Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903,10
Dade Behring MicroScan, Inc., West Sacramento, California 95691,11
Received 26 July 2007/
Returned for modification 11 September 2007/
Accepted 8 October 2007

ABSTRACT
A study conducted by 11 laboratories investigated the ability
of four combinations of erythromycin (ERY) and clindamycin (CC)
(ERY and CC at 4 and 0.5, 6 and 1, 8 and 1.5, and 0.5 and 2
µg/ml) in a single well of a broth microdilution panel
to predict the presence of inducible CC resistance. Each laboratory
tested approximately 30
Staphylococcus aureus isolates and 20
coagulase-negative staphylococcus (CoNS) isolates in a panel
using cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth from three different
manufacturers. Only the strains resistant to ERY and those susceptible
or intermediate to CC were included in the analysis (
S. aureus,
n = 333; CoNS,
n = 97). Results of the D-zone test were used
as the gold standard. After an 18-h incubation, the combination
of 4 µg/ml ERY and 0.5 µg/ml CC performed the best,
with 98 to 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for both organism
groups. After a 24-h incubation, the ERY-CC combinations of
4 and 0.5, 6 and 1, and 8 and 1.5 µg/ml correlated well
with the D-zone test.

INTRODUCTION
The D-zone test, a disk approximation test using erythromycin
(ERY) and clindamycin (CC) disks, which was proposed originally
by Fiebelkorn et al. (
5) and is currently described in the Clinical
and Laboratory Standards Institute's (CLSI) antimicrobial susceptibility
documents (
1,
2,
4), has made the detection of inducible CC
resistance in staphylococci an easy test for clinical microbiology
laboratories to perform, especially if they are already performing
disk diffusion tests. To further simplify the process for laboratories
that routinely perform dilution susceptibility tests, a version
using the broth microdilution test was investigated.
In a previous study at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a test combining ERY and CC in a single well of a broth microdilution panel using results of growth or no growth had produced promising results, but further work was suggested by the authors to define the most accurate concentrations for the two drugs (7). Results of a follow-up study at CDC, using a combination of 4 µg/ml ERY and 0.5 µg/ml CC in a single well, showed excellent correlation with the D-zone test results for 349 clinical isolates of staphylococci (335 Staphylococcus aureus and 13 coagulase-negative staphylococcus [CoNS] isolates), with a sensitivity of 97.4% and a specificity of 99.1% (unpublished data).
In this report, we present the results of a multicenter laboratory evaluation undertaken to validate the preliminary findings at CDC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
The current study involved cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth
(CAMHB) from three manufacturers, the 4-µg/ml ERY-0.5-µg/ml
CC combination described above, and three additional combinations
of ERY and CC (6 and 1, 8 and 1.5, and 0.5 and 2 µg/ml,
respectively). Frozen broth microdilution panels containing
ERY (8 to 0.12 µg/ml) and CC (4 to 0.03 µg/ml) (BBL
CAMHB; BD, Sparks, MD) and the four combinations of ERY and
CC in Mueller-Hinton broth from three different manufacturers
(BBL, Difco [BD], and Oxoid [Basingstoke, Hampshire, England];
with cation content adjusted if necessary) were prepared at
CDC, according to the CLSI reference method (
1) using U-bottom
MIC trays. The frozen panels were shipped to all participants,
along with 15-µg ERY disks and 2-µg CC disks (BBL).
Using these panels and their current routine lot of Mueller-Hinton
agar for disk diffusion testing, each laboratory tested 50 clinical
isolates (30
S. aureus and 20 CoNS isolates) selected from their
own culture collections (as either fresh or frozen cultures)
and 5 quality control strains for each test day (
S. aureus ATCC
29213,
Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212,
S. aureus BAA-976,
and
S. aureus BAA-977 were all used for determining MIC only,
and
S. aureus ATCC 25923 was used for disk diffusion only) (
8).
Additional strains were tested at CDC.
For the evaluation of the ERY-CC broth microdilution combination wells, only isolates that tested resistant to erythromycin (MIC
8 µg/ml) and susceptible or intermediate to clindamycin (MIC
2 µg/ml) were included in the analysis (a total of 333 S. aureus and 97 CoNS isolates). The ERY-CC combination wells were read as either growth or no growth, with any growth recorded as positive. Results of the D-zone disk diffusion test with disks spaced exactly 15 mm apart were used as the gold standard for data analysis. Discrepancies between the D-zone test results and those of the combination wells were resolved at CDC, using molecular testing by PCR for the macrolide resistance genes ermA, ermB, ermC, and msrA, with previously described methods (7).
Additional testing of S. aureus strains ATCC 29213, BAA-976, and BAA-977 was done in all laboratories so that at least 8 test day results would be collected for each strain in each laboratory in order to establish the usefulness of the strains for the quality control of the ERY-CC combination wells. At least 80 test results were collected for each control strain.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Quality control results.
For the 11 participating laboratories, the percentages of MICs
within the range for
S. aureus ATCC 29213 with ERY and CC were
91.0% and 95.5%, respectively. For one laboratory, four of eight
test results (50%) were out of range at the high end for ERY.
With that laboratory excluded, 95.1% of the values were within
range. Therefore, data from that laboratory for the ERY-CC combination
wells were not included in data analysis for the study.
Two of the quality control strains (S. aureus ATCC 29213 and BAA-976) do not express inducible resistance to CC and thus would not be expected to grow in the combination wells. S. aureus strain BAA-977, however, is inducibly resistant to CC and would be expected to grow. Results for these strains, with the ERY and CC combination wells for the three media and the 18-h MICs obtained with one medium, are shown in Table 1. Two of the ERY-CC combination wells, the 4-µg/ml ERY-0.5-µg/ml CC and the 6-µg/ml ERY-1-µg/ml CC combination, provided the most consistent results compared to the expected outcomes. Both ATCC 29213 and ATCC BAA-976 did not grow in any of the combinations in any of the three media used. Strain BAA-977 failed to grow in BBL CAMHB with the 8-µg/ml ERY-1.5-µg/ml CC combination on one occasion after 18 h of incubation at five of eight laboratories (5 of 80 test results, or 6.3%) and after 24 h of incubation in two of eight laboratories (2 of 80 test results, or 2.5%). None of these three quality control strains grew in the final combination well, which had the 0.5-µg/ml ERY-2 µg/ml CC combination.
Performance of the combination wells with the clinical strains.
Results for the four different ERY and CC combinations with
the three CAMHB preparations are shown in Table
2. Sensitivity
error values (i.e., false negatives) are derived from those
strains that showed a D zone but with no growth in the combination
wells; specificity error values (i.e., false positives) are
derived from those strains that were D-zone negative but with
growth in the combination wells. Overall, the combination of
4 µg/ml ERY and 0.5 µg/ml CC performed best for
both
S. aureus and CoNS at both the 18-h and 24-h incubations,
with

98% sensitivity and specificity. The ERY-CC combinations
of 6 and 1 and 8 and 1.5 µg/ml, respectively, performed
well at 24 h (sensitivity and specificity,

98%); but at 18 h,
although specificity was high for both organism groups (>99%),
sensitivity was acceptable only for
S. aureus (95% to 98.9%).
For CoNS, sensitivity at the 18-h incubation was 88.2% to 94.1%
for these two combinations. The combination of 0.5 µg/ml
ERY and 2 µg/ml CC performed poorly at both 18 and 24
h, with sensitivities of

30% for
S. aureus and <75% for CoNS.
The discrepancies for the ERY-CC combination of 4 and 0.5 µg/ml
at 18- and 24-h incubations are shown in Table
3. The only sensitivity
errors that occurred with this combination were at the 18-h
incubation for three
S. aureus strains (all three grown in BBL
CAMHB and two in both the Difco and the Oxoid CAMHB) and one
CoNS strain (grown in both the Difco and the Oxoid CAMHB). There
were three specificity errors for the 4-µg/ml ERY-0.5-µg/ml
CC combination, two
S. aureus and one CoNS strain. One D-zone-negative
S. aureus strain (C-204) grew under all combinations of media
and drugs at both the 18- and the 24-h incubations. When it
was retested, this strain did show a slight D zone but only
when the two disks were placed closer together than 15 mm. This
isolate was not positive for
ermA,
ermB,
ermC, or
msrA by PCR,
but multiple phenotypic tests suggest that this isolate may
indeed express inducible clindamycin resistance, perhaps mediated
by a different
erm gene. One D-zone test-negative
S. aureus strain that was positive for the
msrA gene grew in Oxoid CAMHB
at both times. One D-zone test-negative CoNS strain, positive
for both the
ermA and the
msrA genes, also grew in the 4-µg/ml
ERY-0.5-µg/ml CC combination in BBL medium at 18 h and
in both BBL and Difco CAMHB at 24 h.
Although the clinical need to test for inducible CC resistance
in staphylococci continues to be debated, laboratories should
be capable of detecting it if asked to do so (
6). Using one
combination well in a microdilution format makes the detection
of inducible resistance to CC easy to perform, especially if
a combination well were to be included in a commercial susceptibility
testing system. But as with any single-well test, quality control
can be problematic. The difficulty is that in order to do adequate
quality control, it is necessary to test both a CC inducibly
resistant strain and a strain that is not inducibly resistant
to CC. In order to confirm that both ERY and CC are in the well,
it would be necessary to test both BAA-976 and BAA-977. With
only ERY (at 4 µg/ml) in the well, both BAA-977 and 29213
would test the same as when both ERY and CC are together in
the well. Therefore, testing 29213 and BAA-977 only would not
detect the absence of clindamycin in the well. To avoid testing
three quality control strains each time the test is performed,
we recommend that both BAA-976 and BAA-977 be tested once for
each new lot of MIC panels. Further testing can then be limited
to either
S. aureus ATCC BAA-976 or
S. aureus ATCC 29213 as
the susceptible strain (which should not grow in the test well)
and the
S. aureus inducible strain ATCC BAA-977 (which should
grow in the test well).
In summary, ERY and CC tested together in a single well of a broth microdilution panel performed satisfactorily for the detection of inducible CC resistance in both S. aureus and CoNS. The use of the 4-µg/ml ERY-0.5-µg/ml CC combination for the detection of inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus spp., read at 18 to 24 h, was recently approved by the CLSI Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing and will be included in the M100-S18 tables to be published in January 2008 (3).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank all those who performed 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
(BioMérieux, Inc.); Frank Hansen (Statens Serum Institut);
Judy Rothberg (Robert Wood Johnson Medical School); and Linda
Van Pelt and Guadalupe Mendoza-Morales (Dade Behring MicroScan).
The findings and conclusions in this report are ours and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Use of trade names is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the Public Health Service or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

FOOTNOTES
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Antimicrobial Resistance Team, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mailstop G08, 1600 Clifton Rd., Atlanta, GA 30333. Phone: (404) 639-0196. Fax: (404) 639-1381. E-mail:
jms1{at}cdc.gov 
Published ahead of print on 17 October 2007. 

REFERENCES
1 - Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute/NCCLS. 2006. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically; approved standard-7th ed. CLSI/NCCLS M7-A7. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
2 - Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute/NCCLS. 2006. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests; approved standard-9th ed. CLSI/NCCLS M2-A9. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
3 - Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute/NCCLS. 2008. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: 18th ed. CLSI/NCCLS M100-S18. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
4 - Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute/NCCLS. 2007. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: 17th ed. CLSI/NCCLS M100-S17. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
5 - Fiebelkorn, K. R., S. A. Crawford, M. L. McElmeel, and J. H. Jorgensen. 2003. Practical disk diffusion method for detection of inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci. J. Clin. Microbiol. 41:4740-4744.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6 - Lewis, J. S., II, and J. H. Jorgensen. 2005. Inducible clindamycin resistance in staphylococci: should clinicians and microbiologists be concerned? Clin. Infect. Dis. 40:280-285.[CrossRef][Medline]
7 - Steward, C. D., P. M. Raney, A. K. Morrell, P. P. Williams, L. K. McDougal, L. Jevitt, J. E. McGowan, Jr., and F. C. Tenover. 2005. Testing for inducible clindamycin resistance in erythromycin-resistant isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. J. Clin. Microbiol. 43:1716-1721.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8 - Zelazny, A. M., M. J. Ferraro, A. Glennen, J. F. Hindler, L. M. Mann, S. Munro, P. R. Murray, L. B. Reller, F. C. Tenover, and J. H. Jorgensen. 2005. Selection of strains for quality assessment of the disk induction method for detection of inducible clindamycin resistance in staphylococci: a CLSI collaborative study. J. Clin. Microbiol. 43:2613-2615.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, December 2007, p. 3954-3957, Vol. 45, No. 12
0095-1137/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JCM.01501-07
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.