417Comparison of ESBL rates and susceptibility of E. coli from IAI in the USA, Canada, and Mexico 2009-2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producing E. coli are multi-drug resistant and pose therapeutic challenges worldwide. This report from the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART) compares ESBL rates and susceptibility of E. coli from IAI from the USA, Canada, and Mexico in 2009-2013. Methods. 44 laboratories (28 USA, 12 Canada, 4 Mexico) each collected up to 100 consecutive gram-negative organisms from IAI each year; 5,183 of 12,421 (42%) were E. coli. Susceptibility was determined using CLSI broth microdilution methods and breakpoints. Trends in ESBL rates were assessed with the Cochran-Armitage test. Results. From 2009-2013, the proportion of ESBL+ E. coli showed significant increasing trends in all three countries. Susceptibility of selected drugs in 2013 (values ≥90% are shaded) and ESBL rates from 2009-2013 are shown in the table. Sensitivity analysis for the USA using only the 13 sites that submitted isolates in all 5 years confirmed the increasing ESBL rates (6, 6, 10, 6, and 14% in the years 2009-2013); however, a similar analysis for Canada did not find a significant trend (in 5 of 12 sites) in part due to a larger drop in 2013 than in the full analysis (9, 8, 11, 19, 10%). All 4 Mexican sites participated in all 5 years. In 2013, only AMK, ETP and IPM showed %S >90% in all 3 countries against E. coli. The much higher ESBL rate in Mexico corresponded to dramatically lower susceptibility rates than North America to most other drugs. Despite having significantly lower ESBL+ E. coli rates than Mexico, the US and Canada must take steps to contain further spread of these organisms, and Mexico itself must continue efforts (such as restricting fluoroquinolone use) to address this situation in which ESBL+ is the predominant phenotype among E. coli. Conclusion. E. coli ESBL rates were much higher in Mexico, and although all 3 countries showed increasing trends in the full analysis, they appear to be leveling off in Canada and Mexico. Disclosures. R. Badal, Merck: Independent Contractor, Consulting fee S. Lob, Merck: Independent Contractor, Consulting fee M. Hackel, Merck: Independent Contractor, Consulting fee S. Bouchillon, Merck: Independent Contractor, Consulting fee A. Johnson, Merck: Independent Contractor, Consulting fee D. Hoban, Merck: Independent Contractor, Consulting fee D. Sahm, Merck: Independent Contractor, Consulting fee
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".