Gonorrhea Treatment Failures With Oral and Injectable Expanded Spectrum Cephalosporin Monotherapy vs Dual Therapy at 4 Canadian Sexually Transmitted Infection Clinics, 2010–2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance has developed to all antibiotics used to treat gonorrhea (GC), and trends in GC antimicrobial resistance have prompted changes in treatment guidelines. We examined treatment failures in sexually transmitted infection clinics. METHODS: Four Canadian sexually transmitted infection clinics reviewed treatment regimens, minimum inhibitory concentrations for cephalosporins and azithromycin, anatomical infection sites, and treatment outcomes for GC infections between January 2010 and September 2013, in individuals who returned for test of cure within 30 days of treatment. Treatment failure was defined as the absence of reported sexual contact during the posttreatment period and (i) positive for Neisseria gonorrhoeae on culture of specimens taken at least 72 hours after treatment or (ii) positive nucleic acid amplification test specimens taken at least 2 to 3 weeks after treatment, and matching sequence type pretreatment and posttreatment. χ Test and Fisher exact test were used to assess association of categorical variables. RESULTS: Of 389 specimens reviewed, GC treatment failures occurred in 13 specimens treated with cefixime 400-mg single dose (17.8% treatment failure rate regardless of anatomical site) and in 1 oropharyngeal specimen treated with cefixime 800-mg single dose. No treatment failures occurred using either ceftriaxone monotherapy or cefixime/ceftriaxone combined with azithromycin or doxycycline. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to oral cefixime monotherapy, no treatment failures were identified with injectable ceftriaxone monotherapy or combination GC treatment. Our data support the use of combination treatment of GC with an extended spectrum cephalosporin (including oral cefixime) with azithromycin or doxycycline as well as ceftriaxone monotherapy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".