Impact of the revised CLSI M100 (36th edition, 2026) minimum inhibitory concentration breakpoints on antimicrobial susceptibility interpretation and multidrug-resistance classification of clinical Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates: a retrospective study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20262873Keywords:
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing, CLSI breakpoints, Minimum inhibitory concentration, Multidrug resistance, Pseudomonas aeruginosaAbstract
Background: Susceptibility interpretation depends on the breakpoint applied to the measured minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). The CLSI M100 36th edition (2026) introduced revised criteria for Pseudomonas aeruginosa, including lower fluoroquinolone breakpoints, removal of the gentamicin breakpoint, restriction of amikacin reporting to urinary isolates and removal of the colistin-susceptible category. Authors assessed how reinterpreting archived MICs altered susceptibility categorisation and multidrug-resistant (MDR)/extensively drug-resistant (XDR) classification.
Methods: Archived VITEK-2 MIC results for 200 non-duplicate clinical P. aeruginosa isolates (December 2020–January 2025) were interpreted twice using the laboratory’s previously reported interpretations and the 2026 CLSI criteria. Categorical agreement, susceptibility percentages (Wilson 95% CIs) and MDR/XDR proportions (Magiorakos framework) were compared and paired changes were tested using the exact McNemar test.
Results: Of the 1,871 drug–isolate results interpretable under both schemes, 285 (15.2%) changed categories. According to the 2026 criteria, susceptibility ranged from 35.8% (levofloxacin) to 54.1% (piperacillin/tazobactam). Reinterpretation resulted in increased susceptibility for several β-lactams and ciprofloxacin, mainly through resistant-to-susceptible reassignment (McNemar p≤0.015). Colistin lost its susceptible category, leaving 91.9% intermediate and 8.1% resistant strains, without any MIC changes. Overall, 38.5% of the isolates were non-MDR, 10.0% were MDR and 51.5% were XDR strains.
Conclusions: Under CLSI M100 36th edition, reinterpretation reclassified roughly one in seven results, with a net susceptibility gain for several β-lactams and ciprofloxacin and removal of the colistin susceptible category, while most isolates remained XDR. Laboratories should revalidate these breakpoints and account for colistin and aminoglycoside reporting changes in the antibiograms.
References
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. 36th ed. CLSI supplement M100. Wayne (PA): Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2026.
Tacconelli E, Carrara E, Savoldi A, Harbarth S, Mendelson M, Monnet DL, et al. Discovery, research and development of new antibiotics: the WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(3):318-27.
World Health Organization. Global antimicrobial resistance and use surveillance system (GLASS) Report. Geneva: WHO. 2022.
Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, Carmeli Y, Falagas ME, Giske CG, et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18(3):268-81.
Lister PD, Wolter DJ, Hanson ND. Antibacterial-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: clinical impact and complex regulation of chromosomally encoded resistance mechanisms. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2009;22(4):582-610.
Livermore DM. Multiple mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: our worst nightmare. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;34(5):634-40.
Cabot G, Ocampo-Sosa AA, Tubau F, Macia MD, Rodriguez C, Moya B, et al. Overexpression of AmpC and efflux pumps in Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from bloodstream infections: prevalence and impact on resistance in a Spanish multicenter study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(5):1906-11.
Horcajada JP, Montero M, Oliver A, Sorli L, Luque S, Gomez-Zorrilla S, et al. Epidemiology and treatment of multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019;32(4):31-19.
Humphries R, Bobenchik AM, Hindler JA, Schuetz AN. Overview of changes to the clinical and laboratory standards institute performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, M100, 31st edition. J Clin Microbiol. 2021;59(12):213-21.
Simner PJ, Rauch CA, Martin IW, Sullivan KV, Rhoads D, Rolf R, et al. Raising the bar: improving antimicrobial resistance detection by clinical laboratories by ensuring use of current breakpoints. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9(3):877.
Kahlmeter G, Turnidge J. How to: ECOFFs—the why, the how and the don’ts of EUCAST epidemiological cutoff values. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2022;28(7):952-4.
Walkty A, Adam H, Baxter M, Lagace-Wiens P, Karlowsky JA, Zhanel GG. Impact of a recent change in tobramycin breakpoints (CLSI) on the proportion of Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates that are multidrug-resistant: CANWARD, 2016 to 2021. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2023;10(2):5224.
European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version 14.0, 2024. Available at: http://www.eucast.org. Accessed on 15th 2026.
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria That Grow Aerobically. 11th ed. CLSI standard M07. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2018.
Tenover FC, Nicolau DP, Gill CM. Carbapenemase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa—an emerging challenge. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2022;11(1):811-4.
Pang Z, Raudonis R, Glick BR, Lin TJ, Cheng Z. Antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: mechanisms and alternative therapeutic strategies. Biotechnol Adv. 2019;37(1):177-92.
Sader HS, Castanheira M, Duncan LR, Flamm RK. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from United States medical centers stratified by infection type. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018;92(1):69-74.
Tam VH, Chang KT, Abdelraouf K, Brioso CG, Ameka M, McCaskey LA, et al. Prevalence, resistance mechanisms and susceptibility of multidrug-resistant bloodstream isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54(3):1160-4.
El Zowalaty ME, Al Thani AA, Webster TJ, El Zowalaty AE, Schweizer HP, Nasrallah GK, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa: arsenal of resistance mechanisms, decades of changing resistance profiles and future antimicrobial therapies. Future Microbiol. 2015;10(10):1683-706.
Poole K. Pseudomonas aeruginosa: resistance to the max. Front Microbiol. 2011;2:65.
Bassetti M, Vena A, Croxatto A, Righi E, Guery B. How to manage Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. Drugs Context. 2018;7:212527.
Shortridge D, Castanheira M, Pfaller MA, Flamm RK. Ceftolozane-tazobactam activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates from U.S. hospitals: report from the PACTS antimicrobial surveillance program, 2012 to 2015. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(7):465-17.
Wi YM, Greenwood-Quaintance KE, Schuetz AN, Ko KS, Peck KR, Song JH, et al. Activity of ceftolozane-tazobactam against carbapenem-resistant, non-carbapenemase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa and associated resistance mechanisms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(1):1970-17.
Doi Y. Treatment options for carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacterial infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;69(7):565-75.