Comparative effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin as definitive antibiotic therapy for heterogeneously resistant vancomycin-intermediate coagulase-negative staphylococcal central-line-associated bloodstream infections in a neonatal intensive care unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Heterogeneously resistant vancomycin-intermediate coagulase-negative staphylococci (hVICoNS) are emerging pathogens causing central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients. Given the burden of disease associated with CLABSI and the current lack of therapeutic guidelines, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin used as the definitive antibiotic therapy for hVICoNS CLABSI. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of infants with hVICoNS CLABSI from a single NICU between 2009 and 2014, treated with either linezolid or vancomycin as definitive antibiotic therapy. CLABSI duration, early and late recurrence and in-hospital mortality were compared using propensity score-adjusted proportional hazards and logistic regression models. Results: Of 89 infants with hVICoNS CLABSI, 33 (37.1%) treated with linezolid were compared with 56 (62.9%) treated with vancomycin. The median duration of CLABSI was 5 (range 1-12) versus 4 days (range 0-14) ( P = 0.11), early recurrences were 3.0% versus 7.1% ( P = 0.42), late recurrences 0% versus 14.3% ( P = 0.02) and mortality 27.3% versus 28.6% ( P = 0.90), when treated with linezolid versus vancomycin, respectively. When adjusting using a continuous propensity score, linezolid had an HR of 0.78 (95% CI 0.48-1.27) for CLABSI duration, an OR of 0.23 (95% CI 0.02-2.56) for early recurrence and an OR of 0.9 (95% CI 0.3-2.67) for mortality, relative to vancomycin. Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference between linezolid and vancomycin when used as definitive treatment for hVICoNS CLABSI in NICU patients, in terms of CLABSI duration, recurrence or all-cause mortality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".