An inventory of supranational antimicrobial resistance surveillance networks involving low- and middle-income countries since 2000

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, dky026
Elizabeth A Ashley, Judith Recht, Arlene Chua, David Dance, Mehul Dhorda, Nigel V Thomas, Nisha Ranganathan, Paul Turner, Philippe J Guerin, Nicholas J White, Nicholas P Day


Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) shoulder the bulk of the global burden of infectious diseases and drug resistance. We searched for supranational networks performing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance in LMICs and assessed their organization, methodology, impacts and challenges. Since 2000, 72 supranational networks for AMR surveillance in bacteria, fungi, HIV, TB and malaria have been created that have involved LMICs, of which 34 are ongoing. The median (range) duration of the networks was 6 years (1–70) and the number of LMICs included was 8 (1–67). Networks were categorized as WHO/governmental (n = 26), academic (n = 24) or pharma initiated (n = 22). Funding sources varied, with 30 networks receiving public or WHO funding, 25 corporate, 13 trust or foundation, and 4 funded from more than one source. The leading global programmes for drug resistance surveillance in TB, malaria and HIV gather data in LMICs through periodic active surveillance efforts or combined active and passive approaches. The biggest challenges faced by these networks has been achieving high coverage across LMICs and complying with the recommended frequency of reporting. Obtaining high quality, representative surveillance data in LMICs is challenging. Antibiotic resistance surveillance requires a level of laboratory infrastructure and training that is not widely available in LMICs. The nascent Global Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (GLASS) aims to build up passive surveillance in all member states. Past experience suggests complementary active approaches may be needed in many LMICs if representative, clinically relevant, meaningful data are to be obtained. Maintaining an up-to-date registry of networks would promote a more coordinated approach to surveillance.