MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082389567 · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.161.4.9907147

Multiple Combination Bactericidal Antibiotic Testing for Patients with Cystic Fibrosis Infected with <i>Burkholderia cepacia</i>

2000· article· en· W2082389567 on OpenAlex
Shawn D. Aaron, Wendy Ferris, Deborah A. Henry, David P. Speert, Noni E. MacDonald

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of OttawaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeropenemTobramycinAntibioticsCeftazidimeMicrobiologyMedicineAmikacinBurkholderiaBurkholderia cepacia complexAntibiotic resistancePseudomonas aeruginosaGentamicinBiologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most Burkholderia cepacia strains are resistant to many, or all, of the antibacterial agents commonly used in cystic fibrosis (CF), and selection of appropriate antibiotics for treatment of pulmonary exacerbations is therefore difficult. We developed a technique for rapid in vitro testing of multiple antibiotic combinations for B. cepacia isolates. For each of 119 multi-drug-resistant isolates of B. cepacia, our multiple combination bactericidal test (MCBT) studied the bactericidal activity of 10 to 15 antimicrobial agents using 225 +/- 97 single, double, and triple antibiotic combinations. Of the 119 isolates, 50% were resistant to all single antibiotics tested, 8% were resistant to all two-drug antibiotic combinations, but all were inhibited by at least one bactericidal triple-drug combination. When used alone, meropenem, ceftazidime and high-dose tobramycin (200 microg/ml) were bactericidal against only 47, 15, and 14% of in vitro isolates, respectively. Using a double antibiotic combination improved bactericidal activity; meropenem-minocycline, meropenem-amikacin, and meropenem-ceftazidime combinations were bactericidal against 76, 73, and 73% of isolates, respectively. However, 47% of isolates demonstrated antagonism (growth of an organism when a second antibiotic was added to a bactericidal single antibiotic). Triple antibiotic combinations that contained tobramycin, meropenem, and an additional antibiotic were most effective, and were bactericidal against 81 to 93% of isolates. We conclude that triple-antibiotic combinations are more likely than double and single antibiotic combinations to be bactericidal against B. cepacia in vitro. MCBT testing is a useful technique to help clinicians decide on appropriate nonantagonistic combination antibiotic therapy for patients with CF infected with B. cepacia.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.277 · 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