Multilaboratory Evaluation of <i>In Vitro</i> Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Dermatophytes for ME1111
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ME1111 is a novel small molecule antifungal agent under development for the topical treatment of onychomycosis. Standardization of the susceptibility testing method for this candidate antifungal is needed. Toward this end, 8 independent laboratories determined the interlaboratory reproducibility of ME1111 susceptibility testing. In addition, we subsequently identified 2 strains as quality control (QC) isolates for the method. In the reproducibility study, 5 blinded clinical strains each of Trichophyton rubrum, Trichophyton mentagrophytes, and Epidermophyton floccosum were tested, while the QC study tested 6 blinded T. rubrum or T. mentagrophytes ATCC strains. Testing was performed in frozen microtiter panels according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) M38-A2 methodology. In the reproducibility study, 9 of 15 clinical strains showed interlaboratory agreement of >90% at the 80% inhibition endpoint, with a range of agreement of 76.2% to 100%. In the QC study, 4 of the 6 ATCC strains showed interlaboratory agreement of >90%. ME1111 demonstrated excellent interlaboratory agreement when tested against dermatophytes. Based on this data, the CLSI Subcommittee on Antifungal Susceptibility Tests approved the susceptibility testing of ME1111 against dermatophytes according to M38-A2 methodology, which stipulates RPMI 1640 as the test medium, an inoculum size of 1 to 3 × 10(3) CFU/ml, and an incubation time and temperature of 96 h at 35°C. The MIC endpoint should be 80% inhibition compared with the growth control. T. rubrum ATCC MYA-4438 and T. mentagrophytes ATCC 28185 were selected as QC isolates, with an acceptable range of 0.12 to 1 μg/ml for the two strains.
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 | 0.030 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".