MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003524704 · doi:10.1016/j.vetmic.2020.108601

Genome analysis of enterobacteriaceae with non-wild type susceptibility to third-generation cephalosporins recovered from diseased dogs and cats in Europe

2020· article· en· W3003524704 on OpenAlexaff
Line Pépin‐Puget, Farid El Garch, Xavier Bertrand, Benoı̂t Valot, Didier Hocquet

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Microbiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsVétoquinol (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMicrobiologyEnterobacteriaceaeProteus mirabilisCefotaximeCeftazidimePlasmidKlebsiella pneumoniaeMultilocus sequence typingEscherichia coliGeneticsGeneBacteriaGenotypeAntibioticsPseudomonas aeruginosa

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extended-spectrum-β-lactamases (ESBL) and plasmid-mediated cephalosporinases (pAmpC)-producing Enterobacteriaceae isolates are now reported worldwide in humans, animals, and in the environment. We identified the determinants of resistance to β-lactams and associated resistance genes as well as phylogenetic diversity of 53 ESBL- or pAmpC-producing Enterobacteriaceae isolated from dogs and cats in Europe. Of a collection of 842 Enterobacteriaceae isolates that were recovered in 2013 and 2014 from 842 diseased and untreated dogs and cats, for 242 ampicillin or amoxicillin resistant isolates (MIC ≥ 16 mg/L), cefotaxime (CTX) and ceftazidime (CAZ) MICs were determined. Isolates with CTX and/or CAZ MIC ≥ 1 mg/L (n = 63) were selected, and their genomes were fully sequenced using Illumina Technology. Genomic data were explored to identify the resistance determinants, the plasmid incompatibility groups, and the sequence types (STs). Plasmid location of blaESBL and blaAmpC was evaluated for all isolates based on the co-localization of resistance and plasmid incompatibility group genes on the same contig. Phylogenetic trees were constructed using core-genome MLST. Of the 63 sequenced isolates, 53 isolates harbored a blaESBL or blaAmpC gene. Ten CTX and/or CAZ non-wild type isolates had neither blaESBL nor blaAmpC. Among the 63 isolates, 44 (69.8 %) were Escherichia coli, 11 (17.5 %) were Klebsiella pneumoniae, and 8 (12.7 %) were Proteus mirabilis. Fifty-one (80.9 %) isolates originated from dogs and 12 (19.1 %) from cats. Isolates were sampled from urinary tract (n = 36), skin and soft tissue (n = 22) and respiratory tract infections (n = 5). Thirty-two isolates (32/53, 60.4 %) carried blaESBL genes, including blaCTX-M-15 (n = 12), blaCTX-M-14 (n = 6), blaCTX-M-1 (n = 5), blaCTX-M-2 (n = 3), blaCTX-M-27 (n = 3), blaSHV-28 (n = 4), blaSHV-12 (n = 2), and blaVEB-6 (n = 1). Four isolates of K. pneumoniae had both blaCTX-M-15 and blaSHV-28. Twenty-one isolates (21/53, 39.6 %) carried genes encoding pAmpC, including blaCMY-2 (n = 19) and blaDHA-1 (n = 2). Thirteen E. coli isolates harbored both blaESBL or blaAmpC genes and plasmids of incompatibility groups IncIB (9/13), IncI1 (8/13), and IncFII (6/13). In addition to the reduced susceptibility to CTX and/or CAZ, reduced susceptibility or evidence of acquired resistance to at least one other relevant class of antibiotics was observed for all 63 isolates. isolates clustered in 23 STs, including B2 virulent clones from humans such as ST131 (n = 5), K. pneumoniae isolates mostly clustered in 3 STs: ST11 (n = 4), ST307 (n = 3), and ST16 (n = 2). Phylogenetic analysis identified the spread of E. coli ST131 blaCTX-M-27, and of K. pneumoniae ST307 harboring blaCTX-M-15 and blaSHV-28 or ST11 blaCTX-M-15. We report here a 6.3 % prevalence of ESBL/pAmpC producing Enterobacteriaceae in diseased dogs and cats. This EU survey confirms that dogs and cats can be infected with epidemic multidrug resistant clones that may also spread in humans.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary MicrobiologySame topicAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFrench-language works237,207