In Vitro Activity of Ceftaroline against Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Pathogens Isolated from Patients in Canadian Hospitals in 2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The in vitro activities of ceftaroline and comparative agents were determined for a collection of the most frequently isolated bacterial pathogens from hospital-associated patients across Canada in 2009 as part of the ongoing CANWARD surveillance study. In total, 4,546 isolates from 15 sentinel Canadian hospital laboratories were tested using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) broth microdilution method. Compared with other cephalosporins, including ceftobiprole, cefepime, and ceftriaxone, ceftaroline exhibited the greatest potency against methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), with a MIC₉₀ of 0.25 μg/ml. Ceftaroline also demonstrated greater potency than ceftobiprole against community-associated methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) (MIC₉₀, 0.5 μg/ml) and health care-associated MRSA (MIC₉₀, 1 μg/ml) and was at least 4-fold more active than other cephalosporins against Staphylococcus epidermidis; all isolates of MSSA and MRSA tested were susceptible to ceftaroline (MIC, ≤1 μg/ml). Against streptococci, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, ceftaroline MICs (MIC₉₀, ≤0.03 μg/ml) were comparable to those of ceftobiprole; however, against penicillin-nonsusceptible, macrolide-nonsusceptible, and multidrug-nonsusceptible isolates of S. pneumoniae, ceftaroline demonstrated 2- to 4-fold and 4- to 16-fold more potent activities than those of ceftobiprole and ceftriaxone, respectively. All isolates of S. pneumoniae tested were susceptible to ceftaroline (MIC, ≤0.25 μg/ml). Among Gram-negative isolates, ceftaroline demonstrated potent activity (MIC₉₀, ≤0.5 μg/ml) against Escherichia coli (92.2% of isolates were susceptible), Klebsiella pneumoniae (94.1% of isolates were susceptible), Proteus mirabilis (97.7% of isolates were susceptible), and Haemophilus influenzae (100% of isolates were susceptible). Ceftaroline demonstrated less potent activity (MIC₉₀, ≥4 μg/ml) against Enterobacter spp., Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella oxytoca, Serratia marcescens, and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Overall, ceftaroline demonstrated potent in vitro activity against a recent collection of the most frequently encountered Gram-positive and Gram-negative isolates from patients attending hospitals across Canada in 2009.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".