Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16954233›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2006

Multicenter evaluation of the Etest and disk diffusion methods for differentiating daptomycin-susceptible from non-daptomycin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus isolates.

Laura A Jevitt, Grace M Thorne, Maria M Traczewski, Ronald N Jones, John E McGowan, Fred C Tenover, Steven D Brown

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Increasing rate of daptomycin non-susceptible strains ofPostepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2017
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Daptomycin nonsusceptible enterococci: an emerging challenge for clinicians.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2011
    Article
  7. In vitro activity of daptomycin against Staphylococci isolated from bacteremia and community-onset skin and soft tissue infections in France: data from two nationwide studies.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2009
    Article
  8. In vitro susceptibility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium to daptomycin and other antibiotics.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2007
    Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Laura A JevittDivision of Healthcare Quality Promotion, G-08, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd., NE, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA.
Grace M Thorne
Maria M Traczewski
Ronald N Jones
John E McGowan
Fred C Tenover
Steven D Brown
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · USHuman BioMolecular Research Institute · USCubist Pharmaceuticals (United States) · USEmory University · USJMI Laboratories · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Daptomycin is a novel cyclic lipopeptide that is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections associated with Staphylococcus aureus and other gram-positive pathogens and also staphylococcal bacteremia, including right-sided endocarditis. The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) established "susceptible-only" interpretive criteria for broth microdilution (BMD) and disk diffusion (DD) testing of daptomycin in 2005. However, a series of S. aureus isolates have been recovered with daptomycin MICs in the nonsusceptible range (i.e., MICs of >1 microg/ml). The objective of this study was to determine the ability of the Etest and DD methods to differentiate daptomycin-susceptible from nonsusceptible isolates of S. aureus compared to the results of the CLSI BMD reference method. There was a good correlation between Etest MIC results and the results of BMD among laboratories (r = 0.86 to 0.88), with 95.3% of the Etest MICs within a +/-1 log(2) dilution of the BMD MIC result. A total of 92 of 102 (90.2%) non-daptomycin-susceptible isolates of S. aureus identified by BMD in two participating laboratories were also classified as nonsusceptible by Etest. However, the very major and major error rates reported by one of the participating laboratories were 13.5 and 4.0%, respectively, primarily due to the absence of an intermediate category. The DD method, however, did not reliably differentiate daptomycin-susceptible from non-daptomycin-susceptible isolates. In 2005, daptomycin disks were voluntarily removed from the market by Cubist Pharmaceuticals. The disk diffusion breakpoints were subsequently removed from the CLSI M100 standard in 2006.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialAnti-Bacterial AgentsDaptomycinHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsStaphylococcal InfectionsStaphylococcus aureusAnti-Bacterial AgentsDaptomycin

Identifiers

PMID16954233
PMCPMC1594672
OpenAlexW2112232291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.