MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W106656049 · doi:10.1155/2007/848194

ESBL Genotypes in Fluoroquinolone‐Resistant and Fluoroquinolone‐Susceptible ESBL‐Producing <i>Escherichia coli</i> Urinary Isolates in Manitoba

2006· article· en· W106656049 on OpenAlexaffabout
Philippe Lagacé‐Wiens, Kim Nichol, Lindsay E. Nicolle, Mel DeCorby, Melissa McCracken, Michelle J. Alfa, Michael R. Mulvey, George G. Zhanel

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEscherichia coliMicrobiologyGenotypeUrinary systemBiologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli are increasingly common in nosocomial and community settings. Furthermore, fluoroquinolone (FQ) and even multidrug resistance (MDR) appear to be associated with certain ESBL genotypes. The purpose of the present study was to determine which ESBL genotypes are associated with FQ and MDR in E coli urinary isolates in Manitoba. METHODS: The authors determined the antimicrobial susceptibility, genetic similarity and ESBL genotype of 27 FQ-resistant and seven FQ-susceptible, ESBL-producing urinary isolates submitted to the clinical microbiology laboratories of two teaching hospitals between October 2000 and April 2005. Susceptibilities to beta-lactams, FQs, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (SXT), doxycycline (DOX), gentamicin (GM) and tigecycline were determined by microbroth dilution; pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was used to determine genetic relatedness, and ESBL genotype was determined by polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. RESULTS: Of 34 ESBL-producing organisms, 27 (79.4%) were found to be ciprofloxacin (CIP) resistant, 27 (79.4%) were SXT resistant, eight (23.5%) were GM resistant and 29 (85.3%) were DOX resistant. Twenty-three (67.6%) had MDR, with concomitant resistance to CIP and SXT; 16 had concomitant resistance to CIP, SXT and DOX; and seven (20.6%) had MDR, with concomitant resistance to CIP, SXT, DOX and GM. All isolates were susceptible to tigecycline. Of 27 FQ-resistant ESBL-producing organisms, seven (25.9%) were genotype CTX-M-14, 19 (70.4%) were genotype CTX-M-15 and one (3.7%) was genotype CTX-M-24. Among the seven FQ-susceptible strains, three (42.8%) expressed SHV-type enzymes, three (42.8%) expressed TEM-type enzymes and one (14.3%) expressed CTX-M-9. CTX-M-15 was the most common MDR-associated genotype. Of a total of 19 strains, 18 (94.7%) were resistant to FQs and SXT; 15 (78.9%) were resistant to FQs, SXT and DOX; and five (26.3%) were resistant to FQs, SXT, DOX and GM. PFGE analysis revealed genetic similarity within CTX-M-15-producing isolates only. CONCLUSION: CTX-M-15 in E coli is strongly associated with an MDR phenotype compared with other genotypes. CTX-M-14 is associated with FQ resistance only. PFGE suggests clonality of CTX-M-15-producing isolates within and among hospitals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical MicrobiologySame topicAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFrench-language works237,207