Fosfomycin Susceptibility in Urinary Tract Enterobacteriaceae.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Antibiotic treatment of Urinary Tract Infections (UTI) is becoming increasingly difficult due to emergence of multi-drug resistant (ESBLs, AmpC, CRE) uropathogens. Fosfomycin is an old antibiotic that has evoked renewed interest with unique properties of not sharing any structural similarity and lack of cross-resistance with other antimicrobial agents. Our aim is to evaluate in-vitro activity of Fosfomycin against urinary tract Enterobacteriaceae. MATERIAL & METHODS: The study period was March 2014 to September 2015. All 72 isolates were identified using conventional biochemical tests. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the automated broth microdilution system Vitek 2 (bio- Mérieux, Inc., Durham, NC). Fosfomycin susceptibility was determined by the E-test (bioMérieux, Inc., Durham, NC) method. Interpretive criteria from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) for fosfomycin susceptibility are not available for the Enterobacteriaceae other than Escherichia coli. Therefore, results were interpreted according to criteria for E. coli (i.e., susceptible at a MIC of ≤ 64 μg/ml), as has been reported previously. RESULTS: Overall, 79.16% (57/72) isolates were susceptible to fosfomycin w i t h 92.00% (23/25) susceptibility in ESBL producing enterobacteriaceae and 72.34% (34/47) in CRE. One CRE isolate has developed resistant while on treatment. There was not much difference in number of susceptible isolates CLSI:EUCAST = 57:53,but number of resistant isolates was more with EUCAST (CLSI:EUCAST = 10:19). CONCLUSION: Study demonstrate that, a considerable proportion (79.16%) of the multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae with diverse resistance mechanisms, including ESBL and CRE, found susceptible to fosfomycin. Consequently, fosfomycin may currently be considered a useful antibiotic agent in the treatment armamentarium of UTIs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".