ESBL genotypes in fluoroquinolone-resistant and fluoroquinolone-susceptible ESBL-producing Escherichia coli urinary isolates in Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli are increasingly common in nosocomial and community settings. Furthermore, fluoroquinolone (FQ) and even multidrug resistance (MDR) appear to be associated with certain ESBL genotypes. The purpose of the present study was to determine which ESBL genotypes are associated with FQ and MDR in E coli urinary isolates in Manitoba. METHODS: The authors determined the antimicrobial susceptibility, genetic similarity and ESBL genotype of 27 FQ-resistant and seven FQ-susceptible, ESBL-producing urinary isolates submitted to the clinical microbiology laboratories of two teaching hospitals between October 2000 and April 2005. Susceptibilities to beta-lactams, FQs, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (SXT), doxycycline (DOX), gentamicin (GM) and tigecycline were determined by microbroth dilution; pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was used to determine genetic relatedness, and ESBL genotype was determined by polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. RESULTS: Of 34 ESBL-producing organisms, 27 (79.4%) were found to be ciprofloxacin (CIP) resistant, 27 (79.4%) were SXT resistant, eight (23.5%) were GM resistant and 29 (85.3%) were DOX resistant. Twenty-three (67.6%) had MDR, with concomitant resistance to CIP and SXT; 16 had concomitant resistance to CIP, SXT and DOX; and seven (20.6%) had MDR, with concomitant resistance to CIP, SXT, DOX and GM. All isolates were susceptible to tigecycline. Of 27 FQ-resistant ESBL-producing organisms, seven (25.9%) were genotype CTX-M-14, 19 (70.4%) were genotype CTX-M-15 and one (3.7%) was genotype CTX-M-24. Among the seven FQ-susceptible strains, three (42.8%) expressed SHV-type enzymes, three (42.8%) expressed TEM-type enzymes and one (14.3%) expressed CTX-M-9. CTX-M-15 was the most common MDR-associated genotype. Of a total of 19 strains, 18 (94.7%) were resistant to FQs and SXT; 15 (78.9%) were resistant to FQs, SXT and DOX; and five (26.3%) were resistant to FQs, SXT, DOX and GM. PFGE analysis revealed genetic similarity within CTX-M-15-producing isolates only. CONCLUSION: CTX-M-15 in E coli is strongly associated with an MDR phenotype compared with other genotypes. CTX-M-14 is associated with FQ resistance only. PFGE suggests clonality of CTX-M-15-producing isolates within and among hospitals.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".