Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 605

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Difficult-to-Treat Resistance in Gram-negative Bacteremia at 173 US Hospitals: Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Prevalence, Predictors, and Outcome of Resistance to All First-line Agents

Open access
Kadri, Sameer S, Adjemian, Jennifer, Lai, Yi Ling, Spaulding, Alicen B, Ricotta, Emily, Prevots, D Rebecca, Palmore, Tara N, Rhee, Chanu, Klompas, Michael, Dekker, John P, Powers, John H, Suffredini, Anthony F, Hooper, David C, Fridkin, Scott, Danner, Robert L, National Institutes of Health Antimicrobial Resistance Outcomes Research Initiative (NIH–ARORI)·2018·Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Background: Resistance to all first-line antibiotics necessitates the use of less effective or more toxic “reserve” agents. Gram-negative bloodstream infections (GNBSIs) harboring such difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) may have higher mortality than phenotypes that allow for ≥1 active first-line antibiotic. Methods: The Premier Database was analyzed for inpatients with select GNBSIs. DTR was defined as intermediate/resistant in vitro to all ß-lactam categories, including carbapenems and fluoroquinolones. Prevalence and aminoglycoside resistance of DTR episodes were compared with carbapenem-resistant, extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant, and fluoroquinolone-resistant episodes using CDC definitions. Predictors of DTR were identified. The adjusted relative risk (aRR) of mortality was examined for DTR, CDC-defined phenotypes susceptible to ≥1 first-line agent, and graded loss of active categories. Results: Between 2009–2013, 471 (1%) of 45011 GNBSI episodes at 92 (53.2%) of 173 hospitals exhibited DTR, ranging from 0.04% for Escherichia coli to 18.4% for Acinetobacter baumannii. Among patients with DTR, 79% received parenteral aminoglycosides, tigecycline, or colistin/polymyxin-B; resistance to all aminoglycosides occurred in 33%. Predictors of DTR included urban healthcare and higher baseline illness. Crude mortality for GNBSIs with DTR was 43%; aRR was higher for DTR than for carbapenem-resistant (1.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.0–1.4; P = .02), extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant (1.2; 1.1–1.4; P = .001), or fluoroquinolone-resistant (1.2; 1.0–1.4; P = .008) infections. The mortality aRR increased 20% per graded loss of active first-line categories, from 3–5 to 1–2 to 0. Conclusion: Nonsusceptibility to first-line antibiotics is associated with decreased survival in GNBSIs. DTR is a simple bedside prognostic measure of treatment-limiting coresistance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cid/ciy378

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 605

Metadata

Authors
Kadri, S. S., Adjemian, J., Lai, Y. L., Spaulding, A. B., Ricotta, E., Prevots, D. R., Palmore, T. N., Rhee, C., Klompas, M., Dekker, J. P., Powers, J. H., Suffredini, A. F., Hooper, D. C., Fridkin, S., Danner, R. L., & (NIH–ARORI), N. I. O. H. A. R. O. R. I.
Venue
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2018-07-23
Volume
67
Issue
12
Pages
1803-1814
ISSN
  • 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6591
OpenAlex
W2883234304
Cited by
605
References
2
FWCI
11.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Difficult-to-Treat Resistance in Gram-negative Bacteremia at 173 US Hospitals: Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Prevalence, Predictors, and Outcome of Resistance to All First-line Agents. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/cid/ciy378
The paper
Kadri, S. S., Adjemian, J., Lai, Y. L., Spaulding, A. B., Ricotta, E., Prevots, D. R., Palmore, T. N., Rhee, C., Klompas, M., Dekker, J. P., Powers, J. H., Suffredini, A. F., Hooper, D. C., Fridkin, S., Danner, R. L., & (NIH–ARORI), N. I. O. H. A. R. O. R. I. (2018). Difficult-to-Treat Resistance in Gram-negative Bacteremia at 173 US Hospitals: Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Prevalence, Predictors, and Outcome of Resistance to All First-line Agents. Clinical Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy378

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.