MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1518464227 · doi:10.1128/jcm.38.11.4298-4299.2000

Macrolide and Fluoroquinolone (Levofloxacin) Resistances among <b> <i>Streptococcus pneumoniae</i> Strains: Significant Trends from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (North America, 1997–1999) </b>

2000· letter· en· W1518464227 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ronald N. Jones, Michael A. Pfaller

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Clinical Microbiology · 2000
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésStreptococcus pneumoniaeBroth microdilutionLevofloxacinMicrobiologyTrovafloxacinCiprofloxacinAntimicrobialMedicineClinical microbiologyAntibacterial agentBiologyAntibioticsMinimum inhibitory concentration

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Chen et al. (1) compared the results of tests on 7,551 Streptococcus pneumoniae strains isolated in Canadian medical centers between 1988 and 1998. Strains with reduced susceptibility to fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin MIC, ≥4 μg/ml) dramatically increased between 1993 (0.0%) and 1997–1998 (1.7%), which corresponds to Canadian fluoroquinolone prescription increases (0.8 to 5.5 per 100 persons per year). These findings, confirmed by the experience of others (2; R. N. Jones, D. J. Biedenbach, D. M. Johnson, and the Trovafloxacin Study Group, Abstr. 99th Gen. Meet. Am. Soc. Microbiol. 1999; abstr. C-421, p. 191. 1999) prompted the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program to query its North American (United States and Canada) pneumococcal testing experience for 1997 through 1999. A total of 5,055 S. pneumoniae strains were isolated from eight sites in Canada and 28 sites in the United States. All strains were forwarded to the University of Iowa College of Medicine (Iowa City) for confirmation of organism identification and for testing against a large number of antimicrobial agents (≥30 drugs each year). Methods recommended by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) were used, and the most recently published interpretive criteria were applied (4, 5). The validated, reference broth microdilution trays were prepared by MicroScan (West Sacramento, Calif.) or Sensititre/TREK Diagnostics (West Lake, Ohio). Table ​Table11 lists the percentages of pneumococcal strains found in the susceptible and resistant categories for strains isolated in 1997–1998 (combined) and in 1999. Among the 3,854 strains (703 from Canada; 3,151 from the United States) isolated in 1997–1998, penicillin-nonsusceptible rates varied from 25.6 to 34.7% for Canada and the United States, respectively. The penicillin susceptibility rate, however, for North American samples of S. pneumoniae remained relatively stable (67.0 versus 67.1%) over the three monitored years, with only a slight increase in the strains with penicillin MICs of ≥2 μg/ml (resistant). TABLE 1 Trends in resistance patterns among S. pneumoniae isolates in the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (1997–1999, North America) In contrast to the cited penicillin resistance rates, greater macrolide (erythromycin, azithromycin, and clarithromycin) resistance emerged in both nations in 1999. The rate of macrolide susceptibility decreased from a range of 83.1 to 89.3% to 75.4% in only 1 year. The distribution of macrolide-nonsusceptible strains was dominated by the M phenotype (69.2 to 72.3% of isolates) without significant change between samples or nations. Similarly, the proportion of strains with reduced fluoroquinolone susceptibility also significantly (P 6,000 total isolates from ≥200 laboratories in the United States) also demonstrated an increase in levofloxacin-resistant isolates from 0.2 to 0.8%, between the respiratory disease seasons of 1997–1998 and 1998–1999 (2; Jones et al., Abstr. 99th Gen. Meet. Am. Soc. Microbiol. 1999). The baseline rate for the SENTRY Program (1997–1998) documenting a lower levofloxacin resistance rate (0.2 to 0.3%) was also observed by others (6, 7). This escalated occurrence of macrolide- and levofloxacin-resistant pneumococcal strains appears to be related to selective pressure by current drug use in each class of antimicrobials. The Canadian results clearly showed increasing fluoroquinolone (ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin) use as a contributing influence to the resistance (1). The fluoroquinolone (levofloxacin) resistance was most likely to emerge in strains that were either intermediate (P < 0.05; odds ratio [OR] = 5.8) or resistant (P < 0.05, OR = 7.0) to penicillin. The levofloxacin resistance rates were 0.1, 2.3, and 2.8% for the penicillin-susceptible, -intermediate, and -resistant S. pneumoniae strains, respectively. The levofloxacin-resistant strains also occurred in older patients but were widely distributed geographically within North America (nine institutions). These results confirm many of the findings in Canada (1, 7). Gyrase or topoisomerase gene sequence analysis of the 13 identified levofloxacin-resistant S. pneumoniae strains demonstrated numerous patterns of mutations and no clonality by automated ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. The world-wide problem of β-lactam resistance in S. pneumoniae has been recently complicated by increasing resistances to the macrolides and some older fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin). In North America, patterns of orally administered antimicrobial use have produced contemporary selective pressures that continue to expand resistance rates. Furthermore, sequential mutations of several gyrase or topoisomerase target sites occur more often with the less potent agents (ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin) than with the newer fluoroquinolones (gatifloxacin and moxifloxacin) that have improved pharmacodynamic properties (3). Lastly, clinical microbiology laboratories should offer accurate quantitative (wide dilution schedules) susceptibility tests for the fluoroquinolones to facilitate the early identification of various resistance mutations in pneumococci.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesIntégrité de la recherche
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,427
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,003
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,317
Écart entre enseignants0,292 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations60
Publié2000
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Clinical MicrobiologyMême sujetPneumonia and Respiratory InfectionsTravaux en français237 207