Fosfomycin vs Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background We sought to determine the comparative efficacy of fosfomycin vs ertapenem for outpatient treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). Methods We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study involving patients with cUTI treated with outpatient oral fosfomycin vs intravenous ertapenem at 3 public hospitals in Los Angeles County between January 2018 and September 2020. The primary outcome was resolution of clinical symptoms 30 days after diagnosis. Results We identified 322 patients with cUTI treated with fosfomycin (n = 110) or ertapenem (n = 212) meeting study criteria. The study arms had similar demographics, although patients treated with ertapenem more frequently had pyelonephritis or bacteremia while fosfomycin-treated patients had more retained catheters, nephrolithiasis, or urinary obstruction. Most infections were due to extended-spectrum β-lactamase–producing E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae, 80%–90% of which were resistant to other oral options. Adjusted odds ratios for clinical success at 30 days, clinical success at last follow-up, and relapse were 1.21 (95% CI, 0.68–2.16), 0.84 (95% CI, 0.46–1.52), and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.52–1.70) for fosfomycin vs ertapenem, respectively. Patients treated with fosfomycin had significant reductions in length of hospital stay and length of antimicrobial therapy and fewer adverse events (1 vs 10). Fosfomycin outcomes were similar irrespective of duration of lead-in intravenous (IV) therapy or fosfomycin dosing interval (daily, every other day, every third day). Conclusions These results would support the conduct of a randomized controlled trial to verify efficacy. In the meantime, they suggest that fosfomycin may be a reasonable stepdown from IV antibiotics for cUTI.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it