Rationale for a <i>Neisseria gonorrhoeae</i> Susceptible–only Interpretive Breakpoint for Azithromycin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Azithromycin (AZI) is recommended with ceftriaxone (CRO) for treatment of uncomplicated gonococcal urethritis and cervicitis in the United States, and an AZI-susceptibility breakpoint is needed. Neither the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) has set interpretive breakpoints for AZI susceptibility. As a result, AZI antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) cannot be interpreted using recognized standards. This has contributed to increasingly unavailable clinical laboratory AST, although gonorrhea is on the rise with >550 000 US gonorrhea cases reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2017, the highest number of cases since 1991. METHODS: This article summarizes the rationale data reviewed by the CLSI in June 2018. RESULTS: The CLSI decided to set a susceptible-only interpretive breakpoint at the minimum inhibitory concentration of ≤1 µg/mL. This is also the epidemiological cutoff value (ECV) (ie, the end of the wild-type susceptibility distribution). This breakpoint presumes that AZI (1-g single dose) is used in an approved regimen that includes an additional antimicrobial agent (ie, CRO 250 mg, intramuscular single dose). CONCLUSIONS: Having a breakpoint can improve patient care and surveillance and allow future development and FDA regulatory approval of modernized AST to guide treatment. The breakpoint coincides with a European Committee on AST decision to remove previously established, differing AZI breakpoints and use the ECV as guidance for testing. The CLSI breakpoint is now the recognized standard that defines AZI susceptibility for gonococcal 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 | 0.065 | 0.129 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
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".