Skip to main content
. 2022 Jan 18;66(1):e01196-21. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01196-21

TABLE 3.

Accuracy of genotypic prediction rules V.2 when applied to the German test set

Antimicrobial Total no. of isolates Phenotypic susceptibility rate, % Genotype used for prediction (V.2) Categorical agreement, % Very major error rate (FN), % (95% CI) Major error rate (FP), % (95% CI) PPV, % NPV, %
Ampicillin 50 0 Mutation of pbp5 485M or presence of 466′S/D 100 0 (0, 7) NAa 100 NA
Vancomycin 50 20 Presence of vanA or vanB Flag isolates with vanHAX but without vanRS as potential VVE 100 0 (0, 8.8) 0 (0, 31) 100 100
Gentamicin, high levelb 13 30 Presence of aac(6′)-le-aph(2”)-la 69 10 (0.25, 44) 100 (29, 100) 75 0
Ciprofloxacinc 50 0 Mutation of gyrA (84S) or parC (82S) 100 0 (0, 7) NA 100 NA
Levofloxacinc NA Mutation of gyrA (84S) or parC (82S)
Tetracycline 50 56 Presence of tet(L), tet(M), or tet(S) 94 0 (0, 17) 3.6 (0, 18) 95 90
Doxycycline NA Presence of tet(M) flag isolates with tet(M) L528F as indeterminant
Linezolidc 50 96 Mutation of 23S rRNA G2576T in at least 3 alleles 100 0 (0, 84) 0 (0, 7.4) 100 100
a

NA, not available.

b

Gentamicin was only tested on a subset of isolates using an alternative phenotypic method from that used in the derivation and validation sets. For all three isolates that were phenotypically susceptible, the gentamicin MIC was 128 μg/mL, which is 1 dilution below the EUCAST breakpoint, and the isolate contained the aac(6′)-Ie-aph(2″)-Ia gene.

c

Antibiotic for which intermediate isolates were considered with susceptible isolates.