Wild-Type MIC Distributions and Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Amphotericin B and Aspergillus spp. for the CLSI Broth Microdilution Method (M38-A2 Document)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although clinical breakpoints have not been established for mold testing, epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) are available for Aspergillus spp. versus the triazoles and caspofungin. Wild-type (WT) MIC distributions (organisms in a species-drug combination with no acquired resistance mechanisms) were defined in order to establish ECVs for six Aspergillus spp. and amphotericin B. Two sets (CLSI/EUCAST broth microdilution) of available MICs were evaluated: those for A. fumigatus (3,988/833), A. flavus (793/194), A. nidulans (184/69), A. niger (673/140), A. terreus (545/266), and A. versicolor (135/22). Three sets of data were analyzed: (i) CLSI data gathered in eight independent laboratories in Canada, Europe, and the United States; (ii) EUCAST data from a single laboratory; and (iii) the combined CLSI and EUCAST data. ECVs, expressed in μg/ml, that captured 95%, 97.5%, and 99% of the modeled wild-type population (CLSI and combined data) were as follows: for A. fumigatus, 2, 2, and 4; for A. flavus, 2, 4, and 4; for A. nidulans, 4, 4, and 4; for A. niger, 2, 2, and 2; for A. terreus, 4, 4, and 8; and for A. versicolor, 2, 2, and 2. Similar to the case for the triazoles and caspofungin, amphotericin B ECVs may aid in the detection of strains with acquired mechanisms of resistance to this agent.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".