Low rate of gut colonization by extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing Enterobacteriaceae in HIV infected persons as compared to healthy individuals in Nepal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A worldwide increase in the gastrointestinal colonization by extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing bacteria has been observed. Their prevalence amongst Healthy People Living with HIV (HPLWH) has not been investigated adequately. The aim of this study was to determine and compare the rates of and risk factors for intestinal carriage and acquisition of extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) and carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) among healthy people living with HIV (HPLWH) and healthy HIV negative population in the community. A cross-sectional study was conducted. Rectal swabs from HPLWH (n = 119) and HIV negative individuals (n = 357) from the community were screened for ESBL and CPE. Phenotypically confirmed ESBL-E strains were genotyped by multiplex PCR. The risk factors associated with ESBL-E colonization were analyzed by a multivariable conditional logistic regression analysis. Specimen from 357 healthy volunteers (213 female and 144 male) and 119 HPLWH (82 female and 37 male) with a median age of 30 [IQR 11-50] years were included in the study. ESBL colonization were found in 45 (37.82% [CI 29.09, 47.16]) and 246 (68.91% [CI 63.93, 73.49]), HPLWH and healthy HIV negative participants respectively. HPLWH had lower ESBL carriage rate (odds ratio 0.274 [CI 0.178, 0.423]) compared to healthy HIV negative subject's (p<0.01). In this study, no carbapenemase-producing bacteria were isolated.CTX-M-15 type was the most predominant genotype in both groups. Livestock contact and over-the-counter medications were significantly associated with a higher ESBL-E carriage rate among healthy subjects. This is the first study in Nepal that has demonstrated a high rate of gut colonization by ESBL-E in the community, predominantly of blaCTX-M-15 genotype. This study divulges the low fecal carriage rate of ESBL producing bacteria in HPLWH group compared to healthy individuals in western Nepal. The factors responsible for this inverse relationship of HIV status and gut colonization by ESBL-E are unidentified and require further large-scale study.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".