MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601144035 · doi:10.1128/aac.02209-16

<i>In Vitro</i> Activity of Imipenem-Relebactam against Gram-Negative ESKAPE Pathogens Isolated by Clinical Laboratories in the United States in 2015 (Results from the SMART Global Surveillance Program)

2017· article· en· W2601144035 on OpenAlexaff
Sibylle Lob, Meredith Hackel, Krystyna M. Kazmierczak, Katherine Young, Mary Motyl, James A. Karlowsky, Daniel F. Sahm

Bibliographic record

VenueAntimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersMerck
KeywordsImipenemMicrobiologyAcinetobacter baumanniiKlebsiella pneumoniaeBroth microdilutionPseudomonas aeruginosaAcinetobacterEnterobacterBiologyAntimicrobialCarbapenemAntibiotic resistanceMedicineAntibioticsMinimum inhibitory concentrationBacteriaEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Relebactam (formerly MK-7655) is an inhibitor of class A and C β-lactamases, including Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC), and is currently in clinical development in combination with imipenem-cilastatin. Using Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI)-defined broth microdilution methodology, we evaluated the in vitro activities of imipenem-relebactam, imipenem, and seven routinely tested parenteral antimicrobial agents against Gram-negative ESKAPE pathogens (including Klebsiella pneumoniae , n = 689; Acinetobacter baumannii , n = 72; Pseudomonas aeruginosa , n = 845; and Enterobacter spp., n = 399) submitted by 21 clinical laboratories in the United States in 2015 as part of the SMART (Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends) global surveillance program. Relebactam was tested at a fixed concentration of 4 μg/ml in combination with doubling dilutions of imipenem. Imipenem-relebactam MICs were interpreted using CLSI imipenem breakpoints. The respective rates of susceptibility to imipenem-relebactam and imipenem were 94.2% (796/845) and 70.3% (594/845) for P. aeruginosa , 99.0% (682/689) and 96.1% (662/689) for K. pneumoniae , and 100% (399/399) and 98.0% (391/399) for Enterobacter spp. Relebactam restored imipenem susceptibility to 80.5% (202/251), 74.1% (20/27), and 100% (8/8) of isolates of imipenem-nonsusceptible P. aeruginosa , K. pneumoniae , and Enterobacter spp. Relebactam did not increase the number of isolates of Acinetobacter spp. susceptible to imipenem, and the rates of resistance to all of the agents tested against this pathogen were &gt;30%. Further development of imipenem-relebactam is warranted given the demonstrated ability of relebactam to restore the activity of imipenem against current clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae and P. aeruginosa that are nonsusceptible to carbapenems and its potential as a therapy for treating patients with antimicrobial-resistant Gram-negative infections.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations137
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntimicrobial Agents and ChemotherapySame topicAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFrench-language works237,207