MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752683802 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofx163.105

Agar Gradient Diffusion Susceptibility Testing for Neisseria gonorrhoeae: A Reliable Alternative to Agar Dilution?

2017· article· en· W2752683802 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michaël Desjardins, Brigitte Lefebvre, Annie‐Claude Labbé, Irene Martín, Florian Mauffrey, Jean Longtin, Claude Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsSte. Anne's HospitalCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Est-de-l'Île-de-MontréalInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalUniversité de Montréal
FundersAlere
KeywordsCefiximeAgar dilutionNeisseria gonorrhoeaeAgarMicrobiologyMinimum inhibitory concentrationAzithromycinAgar diffusion testDilutionMedicineBiologyCeftriaxoneAntimicrobialAntibioticsBacteriaAntibacterial activityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Antimicrobial susceptibility testing by agar dilution, the gold-standard for determination of minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) for N. gonorrhoeae, is a labor intensive technique usually performed in reference laboratories. Agar gradient diffusion is a simpler alternative to obtain MICs. However, correlation of N. gonorrhoeae MIC values obtained by the two methods is not well established. The objective of this study is to evaluate performance of agar gradient diffusion compared with agar dilution for N. gonorrhoeae. Methods Fifty strains of N. gonorrhoeae (34 isolates from clinical specimens; 14 WHO reference and two ATCC strains), all confirmed to be genetically distinct using molecular typing (NG-MAST), were selected. Isolates with known high MICs were targeted. Agar gradient diffusion MIC testing was done in a clinical laboratory on all strains for ceftriaxone, cefixime, and azithromycin while comparing two different commercial antimicrobial strips (bioMérieux, Alere) on three different culture media (BD, Oxoid, CLSI’s recommended medium). Agar dilution MIC testing according to CLSI was done at the Québec provincial reference laboratory on all strains. Performance of agar gradient diffusion was assessed by accuracy, using essential and categorical agreements, and by precision (reproducibility). Results When comparing agar dilution and agar gradient diffusion using bioMérieux strips on CLSI testing medium, essential agreements (within 1-log2 dilution) were 94, 88, and 82% for ceftriaxone, cefixime, and azithromycin, respectively. Categorical agreements were 100, 94, and 94%. Agar gradient diffusion, compared with agar dilution, had a tendency to under-estimate MIC for third-generation cephalosporins, not classifying 86% of isolates with decreased susceptibility (MIC 0.12–0.25 mg/l for ceftriaxone, 0.25 mg/l for cefixime) as such. Overall precision of agar gradient diffusion was 96%. Conclusion Agar gradient diffusion using bioMérieux strips on CLSI testing medium shows satisfactory accuracy compared with agar dilution for N. gonorrhoeae MIC testing of third-generation cephalosporins and azithromycin even in a carefully selected panel of strains. Disclosures M. Desjardins, bioMerieux: Research Contractor, Research support. BD: Research Contractor, Research support. Alere: Research Contractor, Research support. Oxoid: Research Contractor, Research support. C. Fortin, Alere: Research Contractor, Research support. bioMerieux: Research Contractor, Research support. BD: Research Contractor, Research support Oxoid: Research Contractor, Research support

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207