MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096256800 · doi:10.1017/ice.2020.1140

Characterization of Ceftazidime-Avibactam-Resistant Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae, United States, 2015–2017

2020· article· en· W3096256800 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Uzma Ansari, Hannah E. Reses, Julian E. Grass, Joelle Nadle, Chris Bower, Jesse T. Jacob, Elisabeth Vaeth, Medora Witwer, Emily Hancock, Suzanne E. Dale, Ghinwa Dumyati, Zintars G. Beldavs, Daniel Muleta, Nadezhda Duffy, Isaac See, Joseph D. Lutgring

Bibliographic record

VenueInfection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCidara TherapeuticsPublic Health Agency of CanadaSunovionPublic Health AgencySanofiPfizer
KeywordsCeftazidime/avibactamCarbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceaeEnterobacter cloacaeKlebsiella pneumoniaeAvibactamCeftazidimeMicrobiologyEnterobacteriaceaeCarbapenemBroth microdilutionMedicineBiologyEscherichia coliAntimicrobialAntibioticsPseudomonas aeruginosaMinimum inhibitory concentrationBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) are a major public health problem. Ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA) is a treatment option for CRE approved in 2015; however, it does not have activity against isolates with metallo-β-lactamases (MBLs). Emerging resistance to CZA is a cause for concern. Our objective was to describe the microbiologic and epidemiologic characteristics of CZA-resistant (CZA-R) CRE. Methods: From 2015 to 2017, 9 states participated in laboratory- and population-based surveillance for carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, K. oxytoca, K. aerogenes, and Enterobacter cloacae complex isolates from a normally sterile site or urine. A convenience sample of isolates from this surveillance were sent to the CDC for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) using reference broth microdilution (BMD) including an MBL screen, species confirmation with MALDI-TOF, and real-time PCR to detect blaKPC, blaNDM, and blaOXA-48–like genes. Additional AST by BMD was performed on CZA-R isolates using meropenem-vaborbactam (MEV), imipenem-relebactam (IMR), plazomicin (PLZ), and eravacycline (ERV). Epidemiologic data were obtained from a medical record review. Community-associated cases were defined as having no healthcare exposures in the year prior to culture, no devices in place 2 days prior to culture, and culture collected before calendar day 3 after hospital admission. Data were analyzed in 3 groups: CRE that were CZA-susceptible (CZA-S), CZA-R that were due to blaNDM, and CZA-R without blaNDM. Results: Among 606 confirmed CRE tested with CZA, 33 (5.4%) were CZA-R. Of the CZA-R isolates, 16 (48.5%) harbored a blaNDM gene, of which 2 coharbored blaNDM and blaOXA-48-like genes; 9 (27.3%) harbored only a blaKPC gene. Of the 17 CZA-R isolates without blaNDM, all were MBL screen negative. CZA-R due to blaNDM were more frequently community-associated (43.8%) than CZA-S or CZA-R without blaNDM (11.0% and 5.9%, respectively); a higher percentage of CZA-R cases due to blaNDM also had recent international travel (25%) compared to the other groups (1.8% and 5.9%, respectively). CZA-R without blaNDM were more susceptible to MEV (76%), IMR (71%), PLZ (88%), and ERV (65%) compared to CZA-R due to blaNDM (19%, 6%, 56%, and 44%, respectively). Conclusions: The emergence of CZA-R isolates without blaNDM are concerning; however, these isolates are more susceptible to newer antimicrobials than those with blaNDM. In addition to high rates of resistance to newer antimicrobials, isolates with blaNDM are more frequently community-associated than other CRE. This underscores the need for more aggressive measures to stop the spread of CRE. Funding: None Disclosures: None

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfection Control and Hospital EpidemiologySame topicAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFrench-language works237,207