Table 2

Comparison of the activities of anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin against fluconazole-resistant isolates of C. glabrata from two time periods, 2001 to 2004 and 2006 to 2010a

Time period (yr)Antifungal agentNo. of isolates testedNo. (%) of isolatesbReference(s)
IR
2001–2004Anidulafungin1102 (1.8)0 (0.0)27, 42
Caspofungin1104 (3.6)0 (0.0)
Micafungin1100 (0.0)0 (0.0)
2006–2010Anidulafungin1626 (3.7)15 (9.3)Present study
Caspofungin1626 (3.7)15 (9.3)
Micafungin1628 (4.9)13 (8.0)
  • a All isolates were tested in accordance with CLSI document M27-A3 (8). Fluconazole resistance was defined as an MIC of ≥64 μg/ml.

  • b Number of isolates for which the echinocandin MICs were intermediate (I) (anidulafungin and caspofungin MIC of 0.25 μg/ml; micafungin MIC of 0.12 μg/ml) or resistant (R) (anidulafungin and caspofungin MIC of ≥0.5 μg/ml; micafungin MIC of ≥0.25 μg/ml).