MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160179793 · doi:10.1128/aac.02020-13

Multicenter Study of Anidulafungin and Micafungin MIC Distributions and Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Eight Candida Species and the CLSI M27-A3 Broth Microdilution Method

2013· article· en· W2160179793 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael A. Pfaller, Ana Espinel‐Ingroff, Beatriz Bustamante, Rafael Cantón, Daniel J. Diekema, A. Fothergill, Jeffrey Fuller, Gloria M. González, Josep Guarro, Cornelia Lass‐Flörl, Shawn R. Lockhart, Estrella Martín‐Mazuelos, Jacques F. Meis, Luis Ostrosky‐Zeichner, Teresa Peláez, G. St‐Germain, John Turnidge

Bibliographic record

VenueAntimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversity of Alberta
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionAstellas PharmaGilead Sciences
KeywordsAnidulafunginMicafunginBroth microdilutionCandida dubliniensisMicrobiologyCandida glabrataCandida parapsilosisBiologyCandida albicansCorpus albicansMedicineMinimum inhibitory concentrationAntimicrobialFluconazoleAntifungal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) using CLSI MICs from multiple laboratories are not available for Candida spp. and the echinocandins, we established ECVs for anidulafungin and micafungin on the basis of wild-type (WT) MIC distributions (for organisms in a species-drug combination with no detectable acquired resistance mechanisms) for 8,210 Candida albicans, 3,102 C. glabrata, 3,976 C. parapsilosis, 2,042 C. tropicalis, 617 C. krusei, 258 C. lusitaniae, 234 C. guilliermondii, and 131 C. dubliniensis isolates. CLSI broth microdilution MIC data gathered from 15 different laboratories in Canada, Europe, Mexico, Peru, and the United States were aggregated to statistically define ECVs. ECVs encompassing 97.5% of the statistically modeled population for anidulafungin and micafungin were, respectively, 0.12 and 0.03 μg/ml for C. albicans, 0.12 and 0.03 μg/ml for C. glabrata, 8 and 4 μg/ml for C. parapsilosis, 0.12 and 0.06 μg/ml for C. tropicalis, 0.25 and 0.25 μg/ml for C. krusei, 1 and 0.5 μg/ml for C. lusitaniae, 8 and 2 μg/ml for C. guilliermondii, and 0.12 and 0.12 μg/ml for C. dubliniensis. Previously reported single and multicenter ECVs defined in the present study were quite similar or within 1 2-fold dilution of each other. For a collection of 230 WT isolates (no fks mutations) and 51 isolates with fks mutations, the species-specific ECVs for anidulafungin and micafungin correctly classified 47 (92.2%) and 51 (100%) of the fks mutants, respectively, as non-WT strains. These ECVs may aid in detecting non-WT isolates with reduced susceptibility to anidulafungin and micafungin due to fks mutations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations49
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntimicrobial Agents and ChemotherapySame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207