An Evaluation of Vitek2™ Direct Susceptibility Testing (DST) of Gram-Negative Bacteria (GNB) from Positive Blood Cultures (+BC).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Delayed reporting of antibiotic susceptibility results impacts the treatment of patients with bacteremia. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of DST of GNB from pellets used for rapid identification (ID) directly from +BC. Pellets from 1.5 mL of +BC in our lab have been used for the direct speciation of bacteria. For 109 samples identified as aerobic GNB on these pellets, the remainder of the sample was suspended in 0.45% NaCl to a standard density of 0.5 McFarland. Specimens were then processed using Vitek2TM N216 cards according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Results were compared with those from susceptibility testing from plate subculture 18 – 24 hours later. Antibiotics not reported on blood isolates from this card including were not included in the analysis. To increase the number of antibiotic-resistant organisms (ARO), 35 highly resistant GNB were seeded into BC and processed as above. Clinical specimens tested included 80 E. coli (EC), 14 K. pneumoniae, 5 K. oxytoca, 3 E. cloacae, and 2 P. aeruginosa, 2 P. mirabilis, and one each of S. marscesens, S. typhi, P. vulgaris, and R. planticola. DST results were available on average 24.8 (95% CI 23.4 - 26.2) hours earlier. Of 235 antibiotic resistant results, there were 2 very major errors (VME) (0.85%) with DST - both in EC against cefepime (CPM). These isolates flagged as possible ESBL-producers based on the ceftazidime (CTAZ) or ceftriaxone (CTRX) DST. Two major errors (MAE) occurred with trimpethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (0.85%). Minor errors occurred in 17 cases all within one dilution of the standard MIC. All of the other tests resulted in categorical or essential agreement. On the ARO tested, there were 405 antibiotic resistant results on standard testing. In this set, there were 10 VME (0.25%); including 1 amikacin, 2 CPM, 1 CTRX, 6 meropenem (MERO). Mechanisms of resistance in these VME included organisms with VIM (6), OXA (3), and KPC (1) genes. All VME with CPM, MERO, and CTRX were flagged as potential ESBL-producers base on the CTAZ result. One MAE with cefoxitin. DST from BC produces reliable results 24 hour sooner than standard testing. Isolates flagged for potential resistance to thirdgeneration cephalosporin and/or carbapenem on DST need further testing. All authors: No reported disclosures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".