Lateral dissemination and inter-patient transmission of<i>bla</i><sub>KPC-3</sub>: role of a conjugative plasmid in spreading carbapenem resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe the nosocomial spread of carbapenemase-producing enterobacteria and characterize a plasmid involved in KPC dissemination. METHODS: Two Klebsiella pneumoniae, one Escherichia coli and one Citrobacter freundii isolated from two patients were studied. Susceptibility profiles were obtained using Etest. Carbapenemase activity was detected using the Carba NP test. β-Lactamase gene content was screened by PCR and sequencing. K. pneumoniae isolates were genotyped by MLST and PFGE. KPC plasmid sizes were estimated by S1-DNA digestion and PFGE-Southern blot. Plasmids were sequenced using Illumina's technology and Sanger sequencing. RESULTS: Two patients sharing a room on a surgical unit were positive for carbapenemase-producing K. pneumoniae. One patient was also colonized with carbapenemase-producing C. freundii and E. coli. Neither patient had known risk factors for carbapenemase acquisition, although one patient had recent surgery at another Toronto hospital; the other patient's husband had surgery in New York City 3 years prior to her presentation. An extensive investigation was conducted at both hospitals, but no additional cases were identified. blaKPC-3 was detected in all clinical isolates. Variable carbapenem resistance levels were observed. Both K. pneumoniae belonged to the same clone by PFGE and MLST (ST277). pKPC-SMH (∼ 53 kb) was identified in all the clinical isolates, showing identity only with structurally similar IncN plasmids. CONCLUSIONS: We describe intra- and inter-patient dissemination of blaKPC. The involvement of a clone related to the successful K. pneumoniae ST258 and the blaKPC-3 gene detected in an active Tn4401 transposon carried on a conjugative broad-host-range plasmid increased the potential for this horizontal transmission.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".