MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094474437 · doi:10.14745/ccdr.v46i10a04

Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization timeof-flight mass spectrometry-based identification of security-sensitive bacteria: Considerations for Canadian Bruker users

2020· article· en· W3094474437 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Kym Antonation, Dobryan M. Tracz, Ashley Dreger, Cindi R. Corbett

Bibliographic record

VenueCanada Communicable Disease Report · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersGovernment of CanadaPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMass spectrometryIdentification (biology)Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionizationChemistryMatrix (chemical analysis)ChromatographyComputational biologyComputer scienceDesorptionBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry (MS) systems for bacterial identification has rapidly become a front line tool for diagnostic laboratories, superseding classical microbiological methods that previously triggered the identification of higher risk pathogens. Unknown Risk Group 3 isolates have been misidentified as less pathogenic species due to spectral library availability, content and quality. Consequently, exposure to higher risk pathogens has been reported within Canadian laboratory staff following the implementation of MALDI-TOF MS. This overview aims to communicate the potential risk to laboratory staff of inaccurate identification of security-sensitive biological agents (SSBA) bacteria and to provide suggestions to mitigate. METHODS: Cultures were manipulated in a Biosafety Level 3 laboratory, prepared for MALDI-TOF MS analysis via full chemical extraction and analysed on a Bruker Microflex LT instrument. Data were analyzed with Biotyper software; comparing raw spectra against MS profiles in three libraries: Bruker Taxonomy; Bruker Security-Restricted; and National Microbiology Laboratory (NML) SSBA libraries. Four years of Bruker MALDI-TOF MS data acquired in-house were reviewed. RESULTS: In general, the Bruker MS spectral libraries were less successful in identifying the SSBA bacteria. More successful was the NML library. For example, using a high score cut-off (greater than 2.0), the Bruker SR library was unable to identify 52.8% of our Risk Group 3 agents and near neighbours to the species-level with confidence, whereas the custom NML library was unable to identify only 20.3% of the samples. CONCLUSION: The last four years of data demonstrated both the importance of library selection and the limitations of the various spectral libraries. Enhanced standard operating procedures are advised to reduce laboratory exposure to SSBAs when using MALDI-TOF MS as a front line identification tool.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanada Communicable Disease ReportSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207