Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28472260›Full record

ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2017

Whole-Genome Sequencing Accurately Identifies Resistance to Extended-Spectrum β-Lactams for Major Gram-Negative Bacterial Pathogens.

Samuel A Shelburne, Jiwoong Kim, Jose M Munita, Pranoti Sahasrabhojane, Ryan K Shields, Ellen G Press, Xiqi Li, Cesar A Arias, Brandi Cantarel, Ying Jiang and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Case Commentary: When susceptibility is not enough in recurrentAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

13 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Samuel A ShelburneDepartment of Infectious Diseases, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America
Jiwoong KimDepartment of Bioinformatics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Jose M MunitaCenter for Antimicrobial Resistance and Microbial Genomics, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Texas McGovern Medical School at Houston.
Pranoti SahasrabhojaneDepartment of Infectious Diseases, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America
Ryan K ShieldsDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Ellen G PressDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Xiqi LiGraduate Program in Diagnostic Genetics, School of Health Professions, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.
Cesar A AriasCenter for Antimicrobial Resistance and Microbial Genomics, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Texas McGovern Medical School at Houston.
Brandi CantarelDepartment of Bioinformatics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Ying JiangDepartment of Infectious Diseases, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America
Min S KimDepartment of Bioinformatics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Samuel L AitkenCenter for Antimicrobial Resistance and Microbial Genomics, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Texas McGovern Medical School at Houston.
David E GreenbergCenter for Antimicrobial Resistance and Microbial Genomics, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Texas McGovern Medical School at Houston.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · USInfectious Diseases and the Research Institute · USOffice of Infectious Diseases · USUniversidad del Desarrollo · CLUniversidad El Bosque · CO

Funding

Caspofungin pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics during intra-adbominal candidiasisK08AI114883 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI SHIELDS, RYAN K · 2015 to 2019
$858k
NIAID NIH HHS K08 AI114883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is marked interest in using DNA-based methods to detect antimicrobial resistance (AMR), with targeted polymerase chain reaction (PCR) approaches increasingly being incorporated into clinical care. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) could offer significant advantages over targeted PCR for AMR detection, particularly for species where mutations are major drivers of AMR. Methods: Illumina MiSeq WGS and broth microdilution (BMD) assays were performed on 90 bloodstream isolates of the 4 most common gram-negative bacteria causing bloodstream infections in neutropenic patients. The WGS data, including both gene presence/absence and detection of mutations in an array of AMR-relevant genes, were used to predict resistance to 4 β-lactams commonly used in the empiric treatment of neutropenic fever. The genotypic predictions were then compared to phenotypic resistance as determined by BMD and by commercial methods during routine patient care. Results: Of 133 putative instances of resistance to the β-lactams of interest identified by WGS, only 87 (65%) would have been detected by a typical PCR-based approach. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for WGS in predicting AMR were 0.87, 0.98, 0.97, and 0.91, respectively. Using BMD as the gold standard, our genotypic resistance prediction approach had a significantly higher positive predictive value compared to minimum inhibitory concentrations generated by commercial methods (0.97 vs 0.92; P = .025). Conclusions: These data demonstrate the potential feasibility of using WGS to guide antibiotic treatment decisions for patients with life-threatening infections for an array of medically important pathogens.

Indexed as

Gram-Negative Bacteriabeta-Lactam ResistanceDNA, BacterialGenome, BacterialGram-Negative Bacterial InfectionsHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMolecular TypingSensitivity and SpecificitySequence Analysis, DNADNA, Bacterialantimicrobial resistancebacteremiagram-negative bacterianeutropenic feverwhole-genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID28472260
PMCPMC5850535
OpenAlexW2611339776

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.