TABLE 1.
Strain | MICa (μg/ml)
|
Macrolide resistance
|
|||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ERY | CLR | AZM | JOS | JOS (ind.) | TEL | TEL (ind.) | CLI | CLI (ind.) | Phenotyeb | Genotype | |
iB1 | >128 | >128 | >128 | 0.03 | >128 | ≤0.015 | 8 | 0.06 | >128 | iMLS-B | erm(A) |
iB2 | >128 | >128 | >128 | 0.03 | >128 | ≤0.015 | 8 | 0.03 | >128 | iMLS-B | erm(A) |
iB3 | >128 | >128 | >128 | 0.03 | >128 | ≤0.015 | 4 | 0.12 | >128 | iMLS-B | erm(A) |
iB4 | >128 | >128 | >128 | 0.06 | >128 | ≤0.015 | 8 | 0.06 | >128 | iMLS-B | erm(A) |
iC1 | 2 | 0.5 | 8 | 0.06 | 16 | ≤0.015 | 0.06 | 0.03 | >128 | iMLS-C | erm(A) |
iC2 | 1 | 0.5 | 4 | 0.06 | 8 | ≤0.015 | 0.06 | 0.03 | >128 | iMLS-C | erm(A) |
iC3 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 0.03 | 16 | ≤0.015 | 0.06 | 0.06 | >128 | iMLS-C | erm(A) |
iC4 | 1 | 0.5 | 4 | 0.06 | 8 | ≤0.015 | 0.06 | 0.03 | >128 | iMLS-C | erm(A) |
iA1 | >128 | >128 | >128 | >128 | >128 | 4 | 16 | 0.25 | >128 | iMLS-A | erm(B) |
iA2c | >128 | >128 | >128 | >128 | >128 | 2 | 8 | 0.06 | >128 | iMLS-A | erm(B) mef(A) |
c1 | >128 | >128 | >128 | >128 | >128 | 4 | 8 | >128 | >128 | cMLS | erm(B) |
c2c | >128 | >128 | >128 | >128 | >128 | 2 | 4 | >128 | >128 | cMLS | erm(B) mef(A) |
M1 | 16 | 8 | 16 | 0.06 | 0.12 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.03 | 0.03 | M | mef(A) |
s1 | ≤0.015 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.06 | ≤0.015 | ≤0.015 | 0.06 | 0.06 | Susceptible |
ERY, erythromycin; CLR, clarithromycin; AZM, azithromycin; JOS, josamycin; TEL, telithromycin; CLI, clindamycin; ind., after induction by growth in 0.05 μg of erythromycin per ml.
According to Giovanetti et al. (9).
Isolates iA2 and c2 were chosen, among the strains of their phenotypes (iMLS-A and cMLS, respectively), because of the presence of an amplification product in preliminary PCR experiments targeting the mef(A) gene.