Macrolide Resistance and Azithromycin Failure in a Mycoplasma genitalium-Infected Cohort and Response of Azithromycin Failures to Alternative Antibiotic Regimens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our aim was to determine the efficacy of 1 g azithromycin and alternative antibiotic regimens in a prospective cohort of Mycoplasma genitalium-infected participants, and factors associated with azithromycin failure. METHODS: Consecutive eligible M. genitalium-infected men and women attending the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre between July 2012 and June 2013 were treated with 1 g of azithromycin and retested by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on days 14 and 28. Cure was defined as PCR negative on day 28. Cases failing azithromycin were treated with moxifloxacin, and those failing moxifloxacin were treated with pristinamycin. Pre- and posttreatment samples were assessed for macrolide resistance mutations (MRMs) by high-resolution melt analysis. Mycoplasma genitalium samples from cases failing moxifloxacin were sequenced for fluoroquinolone resistance mutations. Multivariable analysis was used to examine associations with azithromycin failure. RESULTS: Of 155 participants treated with 1 g azithromycin, 95 (61% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 53%-69%]) were cured. Pretreatment MRM was detected in 56 (36% [95% CI, 28%-43%]) participants, and strongly associated with treatment failure (87% [95% CI, 76%-94%]; adjusted odds ratio, 47.0 [95% CI, 17.1-129.0]). All 11 participants who had MRM detected in posttreatment samples failed azithromycin. Moxifloxacin was effective in 53(88% [95% CI, 78%-94%]) of 60 cases failing azithromycin; all failures had gyrA and parC mutations detected in pretreatment samples. Six of 7 patients failing moxifloxacin treatment received pristinamycin, and all were PCR negative 28 days after pristinamycin treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We report a high azithromycin failure rate (39%) in an M. genitalium-infected cohort in association with high levels of pretreatment macrolide resistance. Moxifloxacin failure occurred in 12% of patients who received moxifloxacin; all had pretreatment fluoroquinolone mutations detected. Pristinamycin was highly effective in treating macrolide- and quinolone-resistant strains.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".