Comparative in vitro activity of PGE 9262932 and fluoroquinolones against Canadian clinical Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates, including molecularly characterized ciprofloxacin-resistant isolates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the in vitro activity of the non-fluorinated quinolone PGE 9262932 against Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates with various resistance phenotypes: ciprofloxacin-resistant, macrolide-resistant, penicillin-resistant and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole-resistant. METHODS: The in vitro activity of PGE 9262932 against 2585 recent Canadian S. pneumoniae isolates with various resistance phenotypes was determined and compared with that of gatifloxacin, gemifloxacin, levofloxacin and moxifloxacin. In particular, the activity of PGE 9262932 against ciprofloxacin-resistant isolates with defined parC and gyrA mutations was assessed. RESULTS: PGE 9262932 MIC90s were < or = 0.015 mg/L for all S. pneumoniae and 0.12 mg/L for the ciprofloxacin-resistant isolates. Resistance to penicillin, macrolides or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole had little effect on the PGE 9262932 MICs. The quinolone MIC50/90s were only slightly affected by the presence of one parC or gyrA mutation, but increased 2- to 16-fold in the presence of mutations in both parC and gyrA, depending on the specific quinolone. With each quinolone resistance genotype, the order of activity, based on MIC90, against the ciprofloxacin-resistant isolates was PGE 9262932, gemifloxacin, moxifloxacin, gatifloxacin and levofloxacin. CONCLUSIONS: PGE 9262932 was the most active quinolone against all S. pneumoniae isolates, regardless of resistance phenotype.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".