Comparison of Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) as Measured by Etests and Agar Dilution in <i>Neisseria gonorrhoeae</i> Isolates Tested from 2018-2024

Abstract Background In the U.S. Neisseria gonorrhoeae is the second most common reportable STI amassing 601,319 cases in 2023. Notably, N. gonorrhoeae has developed antimicrobial resistance, necessitating ongoing surveillance. In response to this threat, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has established antimicrobial resistance surveillance networks including Strengthening the U.S. Response to Resistant Gonorrhea (SURRG) and the Antibiotic Resistance Lab Network (ARLN). SURRG performs testing using a gradient strip method, the Etest, while ARLN labs perform testing by agar dilution, for determining MIC values for N. gonorrhoeae . Methods We compared the concordance of MIC values obtained using the Etest gradient strip method at a SURRG site in North Carolina compared to ARLN using the agar dilution method for three antibiotics: azithromycin, cefixime, and ceftriaxone. The MIC values and the corresponding interpretations for each agent were analyzed according to the recommendations of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). The essential agreements were assessed Results Between January 2018 and December 2024, a total of 1,951 N. gonorrhoeae had corresponding isolates from the ARLN lab available for comparison of which 1,892 had corresponding Etest and agar dilution results for all three antibiotics. We found high levels of agreement between both testing methods for each antimicrobial agent tested over six years including for strains isolated from distinct anatomical sampling sites. Conclusions The Etest method provides a robust alternative for accurately detecting antibiotic-resistant N. gonorrhoeae for public health surveillance, which may make them particularly useful in resource- or labor-limited settings. Short Summary A comparison of two antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods, agar dilution and Etest, for determining the MICs of several antimicrobial agents against Neisseria gonorrhoeae revealed high levels of concordance between the two testing methods.