Skip to main content
. 2014 Mar;58(3):1529–1537. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02155-13

TABLE 5.

Rates of resistance to caspofungin, micafungin, and anidulafungin of isolates of species with available breakpoints proposed by the CLSI M27-S3 document and the EUCAST procedurea

Species (nb) Category % of isolates in category for antifungal agent
Caspofungin, CLSIf Micafungin, CLSI Anidulafungin
CLSI EUCAST
C. albicans (348) I 0.3 0.3 0 NA
R 0 0 0 0.29
C. parapsilosis complex (200)c I 0 0 0 100
R 0 0 0 0
C. glabrata complex (103)d I 34.6 0 0 NA
R 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.97
C. tropicalis (59) I 1.7 0 0 NA
R 0 3.3 3.3 3.39
C. krusei (15) I 6.7 0 0 NA
R 0 0 0 0
C. guilliermondii (13) I 0 0 0 NA
R 0 0 0
Globale I 5.1 0 0 27.1
R 2.2 1.9 1.8 3.1e
a

The overall resistance rate also included the non-wild-type isolates. I, intermediate category according to the CLSI and EUCAST procedures. NA, not applicable.

b

n, no. of isolates.

c

Isolates of C. metapsilosis (n = 7) and C. orthopsilosis (n = 2) were considered to be C. parapsilosis for analysis of the rate of resistance.

d

The C. nivariensis isolate was considered to be C. glabrata for analysis of the rate of resistance.

e

For CLSI, tentative rates of resistance to echinocandins (non-wild-type isolates) were calculated by using the ECVs for C. lusitaniae, C. guilliermondii, C. dubliniensis, and C. kefyr; In order to make comparable the rate of resistance obtained both by CLSI and EUCAST, we tentatively used the C. albicans breakpoints (R > 4 mg/liter) for classifying the remaining Candida and non-Candida isolates (n = 19) as susceptible or resistant to fluconazole and voriconazole; Rhodotorula species, C. neoformans, and Trichosporon species isolates were considered intrinsically resistant to echinocandins. For EUCAST, the isolates were considered resistant if showing an MIC > 0.06 mg/liter, except for C. albicans (R > 0.03 mg/liter) and species from the C. parapsilosis complex (R > 4).

f

Antifungal susceptibility testing results for caspofungin should be interpreted with caution due to the interlaboratory variation reported, possibly due to potency variation (21, 22).