Antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-negative ESKAPE pathogens isolated from hospitalized patients with intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections in Asia–Pacific countries: SMART 2013–2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gram-negative ESKAPE pathogens (Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacter spp.) are responsible for increases in antimicrobial-resistant infections worldwide. We determined in vitro susceptibilities to eight parenteral antimicrobial agents using Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute broth microdilution methodology for Gram-negative ESKAPE pathogens isolated from hospitalized patients with intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) (n=3052) and urinary tract infections (UTIs) (n=1088) in 11 Asia-Pacific countries/regions from 2013 to 2015. Amikacin (98.3, 96.4 %), imipenem (97.1, 95.5 %) and ertapenem (95.3, 93.2 %) demonstrated the highest rates of susceptibility for isolates of K. pneumoniae from IAI and UTI, respectively, whereas susceptibility to advanced-generation cephalosporins was <84 and <71 %, respectively. K. pneumoniae with an extended-spectrum β-lactamase-positive phenotype were more common in UTI (27.1 %) than IAI (16.2 %). Imipenem and amikacin were the most active agents against extended-spectrum β-lactamase-positive K. pneumoniae from IAI (95.1, 91.8 %) and UTI (94.9, 92.3 %), respectively, whereas <54 % were susceptible to piperacillin-tazobactam. Against Enterobacter spp. and P. aeruginosa, amikacin demonstrated the highest rates of susceptibility for isolates from IAI (99.7, 95.5 %) and UTI (90.9, 91.5 %), respectively. K. pneumoniae, Enterobacter spp. and P. aeruginosa from urine demonstrated lower susceptibility to levofloxacin (74.1, 81.8 and 73.8 %) than from IAI (87.6, 91.8 and 85.4 %). For A. baumannii, rates of susceptibility to all agents tested were <43 %. We conclude that the studied Gram-negative ESKAPE pathogens demonstrated reduced susceptibility to commonly prescribed advanced-generation cephalosporins, piperacillin-tazobactam and levofloxacin, while amikacin and carbapenems were the most active. Ongoing surveillance to monitor evolving resistance trends and the development of novel antimicrobial agents with potent activity against Gram-negative ESKAPE pathogens are mandatory.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".