ArticlePloS one2024
Serum susceptibility of Escherichia coli and its association with patient clinical outcomes.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The innate immune system eliminates bloodstream pathogens such as Escherichia coli in part through complement protein deposition and subsequent bacterial death (i.e., "serum killing"). Some E. coli strains have developed mechanisms to resist serum killing, though the extent of variation in serum killing among bloodstream infection (BSI) isolates and the clinical impact of this variation is not well understood. To address this issue, we developed a novel assay that uses flow cytometry to perform high throughput serum bactericidal assays (SBAs) with E. coli BSI isolates (n = 183) to define the proportion of surviving bacteria after exposure to serum. We further determined whether E. coli resistance to serum killing is associated with clinical outcomes (e.g., in-hospital attributable mortality, in-hospital total mortality, septic shock) and bacterial genotype in the corresponding patients with E. coli BSI. Our novel flow cytometry-based SBA performed similarly to a traditional SBA, though with significantly decreased hands-on bench work. Among E. coli BSI isolates, the mean proportion that survived exposure to 25% serum was 0.68 (Standard deviation 0.02, range 0.57-0.93). We did not identify associations between E. coli resistance to serum killing and clinical outcomes in our adjusted models. Together, this study describes a novel flow cytometry-based approach to the bacterial SBA that allowed for high-throughput testing of E. coli BSI isolates and identified high variability in resistance to serum killing among a large set of BSI isolates.
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.