Development of a proof of principle for universal neutralization of antibiotics in cord blood by‐products used for sterility testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bacterial contamination of cord blood (CB) represents a safety risk for transplantation patients. CB sterility testing at Canadian Blood Services' Cord Blood Bank is performed using a 1:1 mix of CB-derived plasma and red blood cells (RBCs). Culture bottles of an automated culture system, which lack antimicrobial neutralization properties, are used for bacterial screening of CB. This process is unsuitable for CB-containing antibiotics, potentially resulting in false-negative results. This study was aimed at developing a protocol for antibiotic neutralization in CB used for sterility testing. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Phase 1: four neutralizers-penicillinase, ion exchange resins L and A, lecithin + Tween80, and activated charcoal (AC)-were individually tested to neutralize penicillin or gentamicin in cultures of Staphylococcus epidermidis or Klebsiella pneumoniae, respectively, adjusted to 100 colony forming units/mL, in Müller-Hinton broth (MHB). Phase 2: combinations of penicillinase plus resin L or penicillinase plus AC were assayed for the simultaneous neutralization of both antibiotics in MHB. Phase 3: penicillinase plus resin L was used to neutralize both antibiotics in CB sterility testing samples (plasma + RBCs). RESULTS: Phase 1: penicillin was neutralized by penicillinase and resin A, while gentamicin was neutralized by resin L and AC. Phase 2: the antibiotics were simultaneously neutralized by the two neutralizer combinations tested. Phase 3: neutralization of both antibiotics in CB was achieved with penicillinase and resin L. CONCLUSION: A protocol for antibiotic neutralization in CB sterility testing samples has been successfully developed at Canadian Blood Services' Cord Blood bank. This in-house assay applies to any culture-based CB bacterial screening method.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".