Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Bacteriology

Broth Microdilution Susceptibility Testing of Francisella tularensis: Quality Control Limits for Nine Antimicrobial Agents and Three Standard Quality Control Strains

Steven D. Brown, Karen Krisher, Maria M. Traczewski
Steven D. Brown
Clinical Microbiology Institute, Wilsonville, Oregon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: SBrown@clinmicroinst.com
Karen Krisher
Clinical Microbiology Institute, Wilsonville, Oregon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maria M. Traczewski
Clinical Microbiology Institute, Wilsonville, Oregon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.12.5877-5880.2004
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

For broth microdilution susceptibility tests of Francisella tularensis, Mueller-Hinton broth with 2% Isovitalex is recommended. Using that medium, we studied three standard control strains tested with nine antimicrobial agents potentially efficacious for treating tularemia. An eight-laboratory collaborative study generated the data needed to propose appropriate MIC control limits.

Standardization of susceptibility testing methods for potential agents of bioterrorism such as Francisella tularensis is necessary for therapeutic guidance in the event of an outbreak with a potentially resistant isolate (4). The low incidence of naturally occurring cases coupled with the hazardous nature of the organism has precluded the development of susceptibility tests for F. tularensis (3). Due to the fastidious nutritional requirements of this organism, the medium must be enriched with l-cystine (1, 5, 6). Additives such as Isovitalex (Becton-Dickinson, Sparks, Md.), which contains l-cystine, are used in media to satisfy such in vitro growth prerequisites. The purpose of this study was to propose quality control (QC) ranges for nine antimicrobial agents diluted in cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth (CAMHB)-2% IsoVitalex with three National Committee of Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS)-recommended QC strains under incubation conditions conducive to the growth of F. tularensis.

MIC testing was performed according to the recommendations of the NCCLS (7, 8). Broth microdilution trays were commercially prepared by TREK Diagnostic Systems (Cleveland, Ohio) to contain serial dilutions of multiple drugs diluted in each of three different lots of CAMHB containing 2% IsoVitalex (vitamin B12 [0.01g], l-glutamine [10.0 g], adenine [1.0 g], guanine hydrochloride [0.03 g], p-aminobenzoic acid [0.013 g], NAD [0.25 g], thiamine pyrophosphate [0.1 g], ferric nitrate [0.02 g], thiamine hydrochloride [0.003 g], l-cysteine hydrochloride [25.9 g], l-cystine [1.1 g], dextrose [100.0 g], purified water [1 liter]). Aseptic adjustment of the pH to a range of 7.3 ± 0.1 was required after the addition of the IsoVitalex. The antimicrobial agents are listed in Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3. The trays were then frozen and shipped to the eight participating laboratory sites which are identified in the acknowledgments. On separate days of testing, each of three QC strains, Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 29213, Escherichia coli ATCC 25922, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853, was inoculated into the MIC trays. The MIC trays were incubated at 35°C in ambient air and read visually at 24 h and again at 48 h. The laboratory at each study site tested the three organisms in three separate lots of CAMHB for 10 consecutive days. During the study, laboratories performed colony counts to insure proper inoculation concentrations. The median colony counts were 4.4 × 105 (range, 3.1 × 105 to 6.8 × 105) for S. aureus ATCC 29213, 3.4 × 105 (range, 2.4 × 105 to 6.3 × 105) for E. coli ATCC 25922, and 4.6 × 105 (range, 3.0 × 105 to 6.9 × 105) for P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853.

Tables 1 to 3 represent the frequency distributions for the MICs of the antimicrobial agents tested with each of the three QC strains. No significant variability was observed among results obtained using the three different lots of CAMHB. MICs read at 24 and 48 h differed by no more than one log2 dilution interval. Three dilution ranges were proposed whenever there was a unimodal distribution of the values, and a 4-dilution range was proposed whenever there was a bimodal distribution of results (2, 8). With one exception, the MICs for S. aureus attained >96% distribution within the proposed ranges. The exception was nalidixic acid: a log2 dilution shift in mode after 24 and 48 h of incubation resulted in MICs at the limit of or beyond the testing ranges (Table 1). For the E. coli control strain, >97% of MICs were within the proposed ranges. For P. aeruginosa, >97% of MICs were within the proposed ranges although no ranges were recommended for chloramphenicol or nalidixic acid due to off-scale results. No ranges were proposed for trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole because of excessive interlaboratory variability. None of these agents are among those considered to comprise the first line of defense against tularemia.

On the basis of the data provided by the eight laboratories, the Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of the NCCLS approved the QC ranges listed in Table 4. For MIC results for F. tularensis read after 24 h of incubation, the 24-h QC ranges should be used; for results read after 48 h, only the 48-h QC ranges should be used.

The first step in standardization of the MIC assay for F. tularensis is the establishment of a broth medium. It is then possible to select MIC ranges for commonly employed QC strains when that medium and the incubation environment required for testing clinical isolates are used. Because F. tularensis requires l-cystine for growth, the CAMHB used for other species for conventional MIC testing methods (1, 4, 5) requires modification. Defined supplements such as Isovitalex provide the required l-cystine, and the NCCLS has approved the use of such a broth formulation for susceptibility testing of F. tularensis.

The choice of antimicrobial agents in this study focused on the reported activities of these agents in the treatment of tularemia. Although streptomycin, gentamicin, chloramphenicol, and tetracycline were the preferred therapeutic agents in the past, newer antimicrobial agents with greater bactericidal and intracellular activity, including newer fluoroquinolones, macrolides, and doxycycline, are now recommended (5, 9).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1.

Antimicrobial MIC ranges for S. aureus ATCC 29213 at 24 and 48 h of incubation

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2.

Antimicrobial MIC ranges for E. coli ATCC 25922 at 24 and 48 h of incubation

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3.

Antimicrobial MIC ranges for P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853 at 24 and 48 h of incubation

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 4.

Recommended QC ranges for S. aureus, E. coli, and P. aeruginosa determined using Mueller-Hinton Broth with 2% Isovitalex

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by a grant from PhRma, Inc., Washington D.C.

We express our gratitude to the following participating individuals and laboratories: M. J. Ferraro and J. Spargo, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass.; D. Hardy and D. Vicini, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, N.Y.; J. Hindler, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, Calif.; C. Knapp and S. Killian, TREK Diagnostic Systems, Cleveland, Ohio; G. Procop and M. Tuohy, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio; R. Rennie and L. Turnbull, University of Alberta Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; and F. Tenover and J. Swenson, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 30 June 2004.
    • Accepted 24 August 2004.
  • Copyright © 2004 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Baker, C. N., D. G. Hollis, and C. Thornsberry. 1985. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Francisella tularensis with a modified Mueller-Hinton broth. J. Clin. Microbiol.22:212-215.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    Barry, A. L., P. C. Fuchs, R. N. Jones, et al. 1989. Statistical criteria for selecting quality control limits for broth microdilution susceptibility tests with 39 different antimicrobial agents. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.12:413-420.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2002. Tularemia—United States, 1990-2000. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep.51:182-184.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    Dennis, D. T., T. V. Inglesby, D. A. Henderson, J. G. Bartlett, M. S. Ascher, E. Eitzen, A. D. Fine, A. M. Friedlander, J. Hauer, M. Layton, S. R. Lillibridge, J. E. McDade, M. T. Osterholm, T. O'Toole, G. Parker, T. M. Perl, P. K. Russell, K. Tonat, and the Working Group on Civilian Biodefense. 2001. Tularemia as a biological weapon: medical and public health management. JAMA287:452-453.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    Ellis, J., P. C. Oyston, M. Green, and R. W. Titball. 2002. Tularemia. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.15:631-646.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    Ikaheimo, I., H. Syrjala, J. Karhukorpi, R. Schildt, and M. Koskela. 2000. In vitro antibiotic susceptibility of Francisella tularemia isolated from humans and animals. J. Antimicrob. Chemother.46:287-290.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. 2003. Standard methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. Approved standard M7-A6. National Committee for Clinical Lab-oratory Standards, Wayne, Pa.
  8. 8.↵
    National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. 2001. Development of in vitro susceptibility testing criteria and quality control parameters. Approved guideline, M23-A2. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Wayne, Pa.
  9. 9.↵
    Risi, G. F., and D. J. Pombo. 1995. Relapse of tularemia after aminoglycoside therapy: case report and discussion of therapeutic options. Clin. Infect. Dis.20:174-175.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Broth Microdilution Susceptibility Testing of Francisella tularensis: Quality Control Limits for Nine Antimicrobial Agents and Three Standard Quality Control Strains
Steven D. Brown, Karen Krisher, Maria M. Traczewski
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Dec 2004, 42 (12) 5877-5880; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.12.5877-5880.2004

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Clinical Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Broth Microdilution Susceptibility Testing of Francisella tularensis: Quality Control Limits for Nine Antimicrobial Agents and Three Standard Quality Control Strains
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Broth Microdilution Susceptibility Testing of Francisella tularensis: Quality Control Limits for Nine Antimicrobial Agents and Three Standard Quality Control Strains
Steven D. Brown, Karen Krisher, Maria M. Traczewski
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Dec 2004, 42 (12) 5877-5880; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.12.5877-5880.2004
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Anti-Bacterial Agents
Francisella tularensis
Microbial Sensitivity Tests

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JCM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • Editor Conflicts of Interest
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Resources for Clinical Microbiologists
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #JClinMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

 

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0095-1137; Online ISSN: 1098-660X