In vitro selection of aztreonam/avibactam resistance in dual-carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the in vitro selection of aztreonam/avibactam resistance among MBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae and to understand the mechanism of increased resistance. METHODS: The MICs of aztreonam were determined with and without avibactam (4 mg/L) using a broth microdilution method. Single-step and multi-step mutant selection was conducted on five MBL-producing K. pneumoniae strains, including two dual carbapenemase producers. Genomic sequencing and gene cloning were performed to investigate the mechanism of increased resistance. RESULTS: We examined the MICs for 68 MBL-producing K. pneumoniae isolates, including 13 dual carbapenemase producers. Compared with aztreonam alone, the addition of avibactam (4 mg/L) reduced the MICs for all isolates by >128-fold, with MIC50 and MIC90 values of 0.25 and 1 mg/L, respectively. One NDM-1-, OXA-48-, CTX-M-15- and CMY-16-positive ST101 K. pneumoniae strain was selected to be resistant to aztreonam/avibactam, with a >16-fold increase in MIC (>128 mg/L). WGS revealed that the resistant mutants lost the blaNDM-1 gene, but acquired amino acid substitutions in CMY-16 (Tyr150Ser and Asn346His). Construction of blaCMY-16 mutants confirmed that the substitutions (Tyr150Ser and Asn346His) were primarily responsible for the decreased susceptibility to aztreonam/avibactam. In addition, transfer of blaCMY-16 mutant (Tyr150Ser and Asn346His) plasmid constructs into certain clinical carbapenemase-producing isolates demonstrated >64-fold increased MICs of aztreonam/avibactam and aztreonam/avibactam/ceftazidime. CONCLUSIONS: Aztreonam in combination with avibactam showed potent in vitro activity against MBL-producing K. pneumoniae. However, our study suggested the likelihood of aztreonam/avibactam resistance among MBL- and AmpC-co-producing strains and clinical practice should beware of the possibility of the emerging resistance.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".