Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26607988›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016

Evaluation of Oxacillin and Cefoxitin Disk and MIC Breakpoints for Prediction of Methicillin Resistance in Human and Veterinary Isolates of Staphylococcus intermedius Group.

M T Wu, C-A D Burnham, L F Westblade, J Dien Bard, S D Lawhon, M A Wallace, T Stanley, E Burd, J Hindler, R M Humphries

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Evaluating veterinaryJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Prevalence ofMicroorganisms · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

M T WuUCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Landstuhl, Germany.
C-A D BurnhamWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1137-840X
L F WestbladeWeill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.
J Dien BardChildren's Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
S D LawhonVeterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9154-8909
M A WallaceWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
T StanleyEmory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
E BurdEmory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA Emory Antibiotic Resistance Center, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
J HindlerUCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA.
R M HumphriesUCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA rhumphries@mednet.ucla.edu.
Emory University · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USWashington University in St. Louis · USChildren's Hospital of Los Angeles · USCornell University · USLandstuhl Regional Medical Center · DETexas A&M University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Staphylococcus pseudintermedius is a coagulase-positive species that colonizes the nares and anal mucosa of healthy dogs and cats. Human infections with S. pseudintermedius range in severity from bite wounds and rhinosinusitis to endocarditis; historically, these infections were thought to be uncommon, but new laboratory methods suggest that their true incidence is underreported. Oxacillin and cefoxitin disk and MIC tests were evaluated for the detection of mecA- or mecC-mediated methicillin resistance in 115 human and animal isolates of the Staphylococcus intermedius group (SIG), including 111 Staphylococcus pseudintermediusand 4 Staphylococcus delphini isolates, 37 of which were mecA positive. The disk and MIC breakpoints evaluated included the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) M100-S25 Staphylococcus aureus/Staphylococcus lugdunensis oxacillin MIC breakpoints and cefoxitin disk and MIC breakpoints, the CLSI M100-S25 coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CoNS) oxacillin MIC breakpoint and cefoxitin disk breakpoint, the CLSI VET01-S2 S. pseudintermedius oxacillin MIC and disk breakpoints, and the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) S. pseudintermedius cefoxitin disk breakpoint. The oxacillin results interpreted by the VET01-S2 (disk and MIC) and M100-S25 CoNS (MIC) breakpoints agreed with the results of mecA/mecC PCR for all isolates, with the exception of one false-resistant result (1.3% of mecA/mecC PCR-negative isolates). In contrast, cefoxitin tests performed poorly, ranging from 3 to 89% false susceptibility (very major errors) and 0 to 48% false resistance (major errors). BD Phoenix, bioMérieux Vitek 2, and Beckman Coulter MicroScan commercial automated susceptibility test panel oxacillin MIC results were also evaluated and demonstrated >95% categorical agreement with mecA/mecC PCR results if interpreted by using the M100-S25 CoNS breakpoint. The Alere penicillin-binding protein 2a test accurately detected all mecA-positive isolates, although for four isolates, cefoxitin induction was required prior to testing. These data demonstrate that the cefoxitin surrogate test does not reliably detect the presence of mecA in S. pseudintermedius isolates and that laboratories should perform oxacillin disk or MIC tests of these isolates when they are encountered.

Indexed as

Methicillin ResistanceAnimalsCefoxitinHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsOxacillinStaphylococcal InfectionsStaphylococcus intermediusCefoxitinOxacillin

Identifiers

PMID26607988
PMCPMC4767974
OpenAlexW2174378920

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.