A Single‐Centre 10‐Year Experience with <i>Candida</i> Bloodstream Infections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical and microbiological features associated with Candida bloodstream infections observed at Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont (Montreal, Quebec) between August 1996 and July 2006. METHODS: Episodes were retrieved from the microbiology laboratory. Different patient episodes and different isolate episodes in the same patient were selected. Antifungal susceptibility was determined by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute's (USA) M27A2 method. RESULTS: A total of 190 different episodes of candidemia in 185 patients were identified. Eleven (6%) episodes occurred in outpatients. Candida albicans was identified in the majority of episodes (57%). Its frequency remained stable over the years. The proportion of Candida krusei candidemia episodes increased between 2003 and 2006, but this was not statistically significant. A central venous indwelling catheter or a peripherally inserted central catheter line was present in the majority of patients (167 [88%]). Of the indwelling catheters removed at the time of diagnosis, 39% were positive for Candida species on culture. Overall, voriconazole was the most active agent (the minimum inhibitory concentration required to inhibit the growth of 90% of organisms was 0.5 mg/L). Resistance to fluconazole was observed in 26 (14%) isolates (C albicans, 4%; versus non-albicans Candida species, 27%; P<0.001). Being on the hematology-oncology unit at the time of diagnosis (adjusted OR 7.8; 95% CI 2.3 to 27.1; P=0.001) and having received fluconazole or itraconazole within the past three months (adjusted OR 8.3; 95% CI 2.8 to 24.4; P<0.001) were significantly associated with resistance to fluconazole in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: At Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, the frequency and species distribution of blood isolates of Candida remained stable over the past decade. In vitro resistance of C albicans to fluconazole and itraconazole remained minimal; resistance of non-albicans Candida species to fluconazole did not increase significantly. The new antifungal agents all had high in vitro activity against the bloodstream Candida isolates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".