MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of aztreonam/avibactam gradient test strip and aztreonam-ceftazidime/avibactam broth disk elution method for susceptibility testing of metallo-β-lactamase positive carbapenemase-producing bacteria

2025· article· en· W4417046579 on OpenAlexaff
Hasan Hamze, Aleksandra Stefanovic, Leah Gowland, Patrick Tang, Nancy Matic, Vyl Leung, Gordon Ritchie, Christopher F. Lowe, Marc G. Romney, Michael Payne

Bibliographic record

VenueDiagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInfections and bacterial resistance
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalProvidence Health CareUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAztreonamStenotrophomonas maltophiliaElutionBacteriaGradient elutionAntibacterial agent

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metallo-β-lactamase (MBL)-producing carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) present significant therapeutic challenges due to resistance to most β-lactam agents, including carbapenems. Aztreonam combined with avibactam (ATM/AVI) provides a promising treatment strategy, but standardized antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) methods remain limited. This study evaluated the performance of the MTS™ ATM/AVI gradient strip (Liofilchem) with the CLSI-recommended ceftazidime-avibactam plus aztreonam (CZA/ATM) broth disk elution (BDE) method in 36 CPE and 9 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia clinical isolates. Categorical agreement between these methods was 97.2 % for CPE and 88.9 % for S. maltophilia. Whole-genome sequencing was used for discrepancy analysis. Based on accuracy, reproducibility, and ease of use, the ATM/AVI gradient strip was selected as the preferred method for clinical laboratory testing.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueDiagnostic Microbiology and Infectious DiseaseSame topicInfections and bacterial resistanceFrench-language works237,207