MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407824879 · doi:10.1101/2025.02.17.25322429

Cefazolin versus Antistaphylococcal Penicillins for the Treatment of Methicillin-Susceptible <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> Bacteremia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4407824879 on OpenAlexaff
Connor Prosty, Dean Noutsios, Todd C. Lee, Nick Daneman, Joshua S. Davis, Nynke G L Jager, Nesrin Ghanem‐Zoubi, Anna L. Goodman, Achim J. Kaasch, Ilse J.E. Kouijzer, Brendan McMullan, Emily G. McDonald, Steven Y. C. Tong, Sean Wei Xiang Ong

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcGill University Health CentreHealth Sciences CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCefazolinBacteremiaStaphylococcus aureusMedicineMicrobiologyMeta-analysisAntibioticsInternal medicineBiologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background There is debate on whether cefazolin or antistaphylococcal penicillins should be the first-line treatment for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteremia. Ongoing trials are investigating whether cefazolin is non-inferior to (flu)cloxacillin, but it remains uncertain whether these findings would apply to other antistaphylococcal penicillins. Objective We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing cefazolin to each of the individual antistaphylococcal penicillins for MSSA bacteremia. Methods Data Sources We updated a 2019 systematic review but specifically focused on evaluating outcomes by individual antistaphylococcal penicillins. Study Eligibility Criteria Comparative observational studies. Participants Patients with MSSA bacteremia. Interventions Cefazolin versus the antistaphylococcal penicillins. Assessment of Risk of Bias The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions tool. Methods of Data Synthesis The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality, and we assessed for non-inferiority of cefazolin using a prespecified non-inferiority margin of a pooled odds ratio (OR) <1.2. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mortality, treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), discontinuation due to toxicity, and nephrotoxicity. Results No randomized data have been published. 30 observational studies at moderate or high risk of bias were included, which comprised 3869 patients who received cefazolin and 11644 patients who received antistaphylococcal penicillins (flucloxacillin=6721, unspecified=2440, nafcillin=1305, cloxacillin=1258, and oxacillin=120). Cefazolin was associated with a reduced odds of 30-day all-cause mortality (OR=0.73, 95%CI=0.62-0.85) compared to antistaphylococcal penicillins, meeting pre-specified non-inferiority as well as superiority. This effect was consistent versus flucloxacillin (OR=0.92, 95%CI=0.73-1.16), nafcillin (OR=0.58, 95%CI=0.28-1.17), cloxacillin (OR=0.42, 95%CI=0.11-1.58), and oxacillin (OR=0.31, 95%CI=0.03-2.75). Point estimates favored cefazolin for 90-day mortality, TRAEs, nephrotoxicity, and discontinuation due to toxicity overall and in each comparison with individual antistaphylococcal penicillins, except for TRAEs versus cloxacillin. Conclusions In moderate to low quality observational data, cefazolin was associated with superior effectiveness and safety as compared to antistaphylococcal penicillins overall and individually.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.036
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusFrench-language works237,207