Table 3.

Relative efficiencies of various diagnostics used for the identification of Candida auris

Diagnostic tool (usage frequency, n = 38)	Combined sample size	Sensitivity (%)	Specificity (%)	Turnaround time (hr)	Relative cost	Skill level required	References
Phenotypic and/or culture‐based media or methods
CHROMagar Candida at 40–42°C (9/38)	37	40–73	0	24–48	Cheaper	Minor	Azar et al. (2017), Ben‐Ami et al. (2017), Chowdhary et al. (2014), Emara et al. (2015), Khillan et al. (2014), Kumar et al. (2015), Morales‐Lopez et al. (2017), Ruiz Gaitán et al. (2017), Satoh et al. (2009)
CHROM Candida supplemented with Pal's medium at 37–42 °C (1/38)	15	100	100	24–48	Cheaper	Minor	Kumar et al. (2017)
MAST ID CHROMagar Candida at 42°C (1/38)	1	0	100	24–48	Cheaper	Minor	Emara et al. (2015)
BBL Mycosel agar ± cycloheximide (2/38)	9	0	100	24–48	Cheaper	Minor	Emara et al. (2015), Ruiz Gaitán et al. (2017)
Brilliance Candida Agar (1/38)	50	0	0	24–48	Cheaper	Minor	Schelenz et al. (2016)
Salt Sabouraud broth with dextrose (1/38)	77	100	≤100	24–48	Cheapest	Minor	Welsh et al. (2017)
Salt Sabouraud broth with dulcitol/mannitol (1/38)	77	100	100	24–48	Cheapest	Minor	Welsh et al. (2017)
Salt Yeast Nitrogen base broth + dulcitol/mannitol (1/38)	77	100	100	24–48	Cheapest	Minor	Welsh et al. (2017)
Commercial identification instruments/kits
API 20C (7/38)	48	0	0	18–72	Cheap	Minor	Chowdhary et al. (2013), Larkin et al. (2017), Lee et al. (2011), Magobo et al. (2014), Mohsin et al. (2017), Morales‐Lopez et al. (2017), Ruiz Gaitán et al. (2017)
AuxaColor™ 2 (1/38)	8	0	0	24–48	Cheap	Minor	Ruiz Gaitán et al. (2017)
Microscan Walkaway & AutoSCAN 4 (1/38)	17	0	0	(24+) 2–≤24	Expensive	High	Morales‐Lopez et al. (2017)
BD Phoenix Yeast ID panel (3/38)	24	0	0	(24+) 4–15	Expensive	High	Al‐Siyabi et al. (2017), Kim et al. (2016), Morales‐Lopez et al. (2017)
VITEK 2 YST ID (20/38)	190	0	0	(24+)	Expensive	High	Azar et al. (2017), Ben‐Ami et al. (2017), Calvo et al. (2016), Chakrabarti et al. (2015), Chatterjee et al. (2015), Chowdhary et al. (2013), Emara et al. (2015), Khillan et al. (2014), Kim et al. (2009, 2016), Larkin et al. (2017), Lee et al. (2011), Magobo et al. (2014), Morales‐Lopez et al. (2017), Oh et al. (2011), Rudramurthy et al. (2017), Sarma et al. (2013), Satoh et al. (2009), Sharma et al. (2015), Shin et al. (2012), Wattal et al. (2017)
VITEK MS MALDI‐TOF (4/38)	28	100	100	≤12	Very expensive	High	Azar et al. (2017), Kim et al. (2016), Ruiz Gaitán et al. (2017), Wattal et al. (2017)
Bruker Biotyper MALDI‐TOF (10/38)	223	100	100	≤12	Very expensive	High	Azar et al. (2017), Borman et al. (2016, 2017), Ghosh et al. (2015), Kathuria et al. (2015), Kim et al. (2016), Mohsin et al. (2017), Prakash et al. (2016), Schelenz et al. (2016), Schwartz and Hammond (2017)
Molecular‐based methods
Conventional PCR (29/38)	484	100	100	2.5	Expensive	Very high	Ben‐Ami et al. (2017), Borman et al. (2016, 2017), Calvo et al. (2016), Chakrabarti et al. (2015), Chatterjee et al. (2015), Chowdhary et al. (2013, 2014), Emara et al. (2015), Ghosh et al. (2015), Kathuria et al. (2015), Khillan et al. (2014), Kim et al. (2009, 2016), Kordalewska et al. (2017), Kumar et al. (2015), Larkin et al. (2017), Lee et al. (2011), Magobo et al. (2014), Mohsin et al. (2017), Oh et al. (2011), Prakash et al. (2016), Rudramurthy et al. (2017), Ruiz Gaitán et al. (2017), Sarma et al. (2013), Satoh et al. (2009), Sharma et al. (2015), Shin et al. (2012), Wattal et al. (2017)
AFLP (4/38)	184	100	100	2.5–4	Expensive	Very high	Calvo et al. (2016), Chowdhary et al. (2013), Prakash et al. (2016), Schelenz et al. (2016)
Real‐time PCR (1/38)	140	100	100	2	Expensive	Very high	Kordalewska et al. (2017)
WGS (6/38)	160	100	100	8–72	Very expensive	Highest	Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2017a), Chatterjee et al. (2015), Lockhart et al. (2017), Schwartz and Hammond (2017), Tsay et al. (2017), Vallabhaneni et al. (2016)