Susceptibility profiles of nutritionally variant streptococci (NVS) recovered from invasive cases in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Both Abiotrophia spp and Granulicatella spp have been shown to cause invasive infections, including endocarditis. Historically, these organisms were commonly referred to as nutritionally variant streptococci (NVS), as they were challenging to culture and required special media supplements for growth in vitro. Current guidelines for the management of endocarditis caused by NVS suggest treating patients with beta-lactams, particularly benzylpenicillin, but data supporting this recommendation are sparse and do not differentiate antibiotic treatment between the two species. Objective: To determine susceptibility profiles of Abiotrophia spp and Granulicatella spp recovered from invasive infections. Results: Between January 2010 and June 2015, 219 clinical isolates of NVS were submitted to the Public Health Ontario Laboratory for identification and/or susceptibility testing. The majority of these isolates (162/219; 74%) were recovered from blood cultures. Granulicatella spp showed greater susceptibility to penicillin than Abiotrophia spp (65.4% versus 23.7%). On the other hand, Abiotrophia spp isolates showed greater susceptibility to third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins than Granulicatella spp. Both Abiotrophia spp and Granulicatella spp isolates were universally susceptible to vancomycin. Conclusion: The findings demonstrate that susceptibility of NVS to commonly recommended antimicrobials depends on genus with Granulicatella spp exhibiting higher susceptibility to penicillin (the commonly recommended treatment for endocarditis caused by NVS) than Abiotrophia spp. Therefore, accurate identification and routine susceptibility testing of NVS would improve effective management of patients with invasive 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".