MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773882131 · doi:10.1093/jac/dkx468

In vitro activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus antimicrobial non-susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates including MDR and XDR isolates obtained from across Canada as part of the CANWARD study, 2008–16

2017· article· en· W2773882131 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrew Walkty, Heather J. Adam, Melanie Baxter, Philippe Lagacé‐Wiens, James A. Karlowsky, Daryl J. Hoban, George G. Zhanel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaShared Health
FundersMerck CanadaAstellas PharmaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsPseudomonas aeruginosaAntimicrobialMicrobiologyTazobactamBroth microdilutionCiprofloxacinAmikacinBiologyAntibioticsMedicineAntibiotic resistanceMinimum inhibitory concentrationBacteriaImipenem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Ceftolozane/tazobactam is a novel β-lactam β-lactamase inhibitor combination with a broad spectrum of activity that includes Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the in vitro activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam and relevant comparators versus a large collection of antimicrobial non-susceptible P. aeruginosa clinical isolates recovered from patients across Canada (CANWARD, 2008-16). Methods: Susceptibility testing was performed on P. aeruginosa clinical isolates obtained from sentinel hospitals across Canada between January 2008 and December 2016 using broth microdilution, as described by the CLSI. MDR P. aeruginosa were defined as isolates that tested non-susceptible to at least one antimicrobial from ≥3 classes. XDR P. aeruginosa were defined as isolates that tested non-susceptible to at least one antimicrobial from ≥5 classes. Results: In total, 3229 P. aeruginosa isolates were obtained as a part of CANWARD. Ceftolozane/tazobactam was the most active antimicrobial evaluated, with 98.3% of isolates testing susceptible. The percentage of antimicrobial non-susceptible isolates that remained susceptible to ceftolozane/tazobactam ranged from 85.3% (amikacin non-susceptible subset) to 95.0% (ciprofloxacin non-susceptible subset). Four-hundred and sixty-two P. aeruginosa isolates were MDR (14.3% of all isolates tested) and 84 were XDR (2.6% of all isolates tested). Ceftolozane/tazobactam demonstrated excellent in vitro activity versus the MDR and XDR isolates, with 90.5% and 78.6% remaining susceptible, respectively. Conclusions: Ceftolozane/tazobactam demonstrated excellent in vitro activity against antimicrobial non-susceptible P. aeruginosa clinical isolates, including MDR and XDR subsets. It may prove useful in the treatment of infections caused by these organisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations25
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Antimicrobial ChemotherapySame topicAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFrench-language works237,207