The effect of antibiotic selection on collateral effects and evolvability of uropathogenic Escherichia coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Trimethoprim is recommended as a first-line treatment of urinary tract infections (UTIs) in the UK. In 2018, 31.4% of Escherichia coli isolated from UTIs in England were trimethoprim-resistant, leading to overreliance on other first and second-line antibiotics. Here, we assessed whether, in principle, prior selection with trimethoprim results in collateral effects to other antibiotics recommended for the treatment of UTIs. As collateral effects, we considered changes in susceptibility, mutation-selection window and population establishment probability. We selected 10 trimethoprim-resistant derivatives from three clinical isolates of uropathogenic Escherichia coli. We found that mutations conferring trimethoprim resistance did not have any collateral effects on fosfomycin. In contrast, resistance to trimethoprim resulted in decreased susceptibility (collateral resistance) to nitrofurantoin, below the clinical breakpoint and narrowed the mutation-selection window, thereby reducing the maximum concentration for selection of nitrofurantoin resistance mutations. Our analyses demonstrate that multiple collateral responses should be accounted for when predicting and optimising antibiotic use, limiting future antimicrobial resistance emergence.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".