ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2022
Real-World Performance of Susceptibility Testing for Ceftolozane/Tazobactam against Non-Carbapenemase-Producing Carbapenem-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal analysis of prevalence and antibiotic-resistance patterns in Stenotrophomonas maltophilia clinical isolates in a 19-year retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Approaches to Testing Novel β-Lactam and β-Lactam Combination Agents in the Clinical Laboratory.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Role of the multi-drug efflux systems on the baseline susceptibility to ceftazidime/avibactam and ceftolozane/tazobactam in clinical isolates of non-carbapenemase-producing carbapenem-resistantFrontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ceftolozane/tazbactam (C/T) is a potent anti-pseudomonal agent that has clinical utility against infections caused by non-carbapenemase, producing-carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (non-CP-CR-PA). Accurate, precise, and reliable antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is crucial to guide clinical decisions. However, studies assessing the performance of different AST methods against non-CP-CR-PA (the main clinical niche for C/T), are lacking. Here, we evaluated performance of gradient strips (Etest and MIC test strip [MTS], and disk diffusion [DD]) using CLSI breakpoints. Additionally, we assessed the performance of DD using EUCAST breakpoints. For all susceptibility tests, we used a collection of 97 non-CP-CR-PA clinical isolates recovered from 11 Chilean hospitals. Both gradient strips and DD had acceptable performance when using CLSI breakpoints, yielding a categorical agreement (CA) of >90% and 92%, respectively. In contrast, DD using EUCAST breakpoints performed suboptimally (CA 81%). MTS yielded a higher essential agreement (EA, >90%) than Etest (84%). Importantly, the performance of all methods varied significantly when the isolates were stratified by their degree of susceptibility to other anti-pseudomonal β-lactams. All methods had 100% CA when testing isolates that were pan-susceptible to all β-lactams (Pan-β-S). However, the CA markedly decreased when testing isolates resistant to all β-lactams (Pan-β-R). Indeed, the CA was 81% for Etest (six errors), 78% for MTS (seven errors), and 78% and 56% for DD when using CLSI (seven errors) or EUCAST breakpoints (14 errors), respectively. Our results suggest that all manual AST methods have strikingly decreased performance in the context of Pan-β-R P. aeruginosa with potentially major clinical implications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.