Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38775873›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2024

Activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam and imipenem/relebactam against clinical isolates of Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa collected in Greece and Italy-SMART 2017-2021.

James A Karlowsky, Sibylle H Lob, Stephen P Hawser, Nimmi Kothari, Fakhar Siddiqui, Irina Alekseeva, C Andrew DeRyke, Katherine Young, Mary R Motyl, Daniel F Sahm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Global epidemiology of carbapenem-resistantJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors.

James A KarlowskyIHMA, 2122 Palmer Drive, Schaumburg, IL, 60173, USA. jkarlowsky@sharedhealthmb.ca.
Sibylle H LobIHMA, 2122 Palmer Drive, Schaumburg, IL, 60173, USA.
Stephen P HawserIHMA, Monthey, Switzerland.
Nimmi KothariIHMA, Monthey, Switzerland.
Fakhar SiddiquiMerck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Irina AlekseevaMSD, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
C Andrew DeRykeMerck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Katherine YoungMerck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Mary R MotylMerck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Daniel F SahmIHMA, 2122 Palmer Drive, Schaumburg, IL, 60173, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe current study evaluated the in vitro activities of ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T), imipenem/relebactam (IMI/REL), and comparators against recent (2017-2021) clinical isolates of gram-negative bacilli from two countries in southern Europe.

methodsNine clinical laboratories (two in Greece; seven in Italy) each collected up to 250 consecutive gram-negative isolates per year from lower respiratory tract, intraabdominal, urinary tract, and bloodstream infection samples. MICs were determined by the CLSI broth microdilution method and interpreted using 2022 EUCAST breakpoints. β-lactamase genes were identified in select β-lactam-nonsusceptible isolate subsets.

resultsC/T inhibited the growth of 85-87% of Enterobacterales and 94-96% of ESBL-positive non-CRE NME (non-Morganellaceae Enterobacterales) isolates from both countries. IMI/REL inhibited 95-98% of NME, 100% of ESBL-positive non-CRE NME, and 98-99% of KPC-positive NME isolates from both countries. Country-specific differences in percent susceptible values for C/T, IMI/REL, meropenem, piperacillin/tazobactam, levofloxacin, and amikacin were more pronounced for Pseudomonas aeruginosa than Enterobacterales. C/T and IMI/REL both inhibited 84% of P. aeruginosa isolates from Greece and 91-92% of isolates from Italy. MBL rates were estimated as 4% of Enterobacterales and 10% of P. aeruginosa isolates from Greece compared to 1% of Enterobacterales and 3% of P. aeruginosa isolates from Italy. KPC rates among Enterobacterales isolates were similar in both countries (7-8%). OXA-48-like enzymes were only identified in Enterobacterales isolates from Italy (1%) while GES carbapenemase genes were only identified in P. aeruginosa isolates from Italy (2%).

conclusionWe conclude that C/T and IMI/REL may provide viable treatment options for many patients from Greece and Italy.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCephalosporinsEnterobacteriaceaeImipenemMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPseudomonas aeruginosaTazobactamAzabicyclo Compoundsbeta-LactamasesEnterobacteriaceae InfectionsGreeceHumansItalyPseudomonas InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsAzabicyclo Compoundsbeta-Lactamasesceftolozane, tazobactam drug combinationCephalosporinsImipenemrelebactamTazobactamCeftolozane/tazobactamEnterobacteralesImipenem/relebactamPseudomonas aeruginosaSMARTSouthern Europe

Identifiers

PMID38775873
PMCPMC11271313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.