<i>In vitro</i> activity of fosfomycin against bacterial pathogens isolated from urine specimens in Canada from 2007 to 2020: CANWARD surveillance study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multiple susceptible breakpoints are published to interpret fosfomycin MICs: ≤64 mg/L for Escherichia coli and Enterococcus faecalis grown from urine (CLSI M100); ≤32 mg/L for Enterobacterales and staphylococci when parenteral fosfomycin is prescribed (EUCAST); and ≤8 mg/L for uncomplicated urinary tract infection with E. coli when oral fosfomycin is used (EUCAST). Clinical laboratories are frequently requested to test fosfomycin against antimicrobial-resistant urinary isolates not included in standard documents. METHODS: The in vitro activity of fosfomycin was determined using the CLSI agar dilution method for a 2007-20 collection of clinically significant Gram-negative (3656 Enterobacterales; 140 Pseudomonas aeruginosa) and Gram-positive (346 E. faecalis; 94 Staphylococcus aureus) urinary isolates from the CANWARD surveillance study. Comparator agents were tested using CLSI broth microdilution. RESULTS: Using the CLSI MIC breakpoint (≤64 mg/L), 99.2% of E. coli (n = 2871; MIC90, 4 mg/L), including 96.7% of ESBL-positive isolates, were fosfomycin susceptible. Similarly, 95.8% of E. coli, including 95.2% of ESBL-positive isolates, were fosfomycin susceptible at ≤8 mg/L (EUCAST oral susceptible MIC breakpoint). All other species of Enterobacterales (except Citrobacter freundii) and P. aeruginosa had higher fosfomycin MICs (MIC90s, 64 to >512 mg/L) than E. coli. Using published breakpoints, 88.4% of E. faecalis (MIC ≤64 mg/L) and 97.9% of S. aureus (MIC ≤32 mg/L) isolates were fosfomycin susceptible. CONCLUSIONS: Fosfomycin demonstrated in vitro activity against frequently encountered Gram-positive and Gram-negative urinary pathogens; however, the extrapolation of current CLSI and EUCAST MIC breakpoints to pathogens not specified by standard methods requires further study and is currently not recommended.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".