Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 195

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

WGS to predict antibiotic MICs for Neisseria gonorrhoeae

Open access
Eyre, David W., De Silva, Dilrini, Cole, Kevin, Peters, Joanna, Cole, Michelle J., Grad, Yonatan H., Demczuk, Walter, Martin, Irene, Mulvey, Michael R., Crook, Derrick W., Walker, A. Sarah, Peto, Tim E. A., Paul, John·2017·Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

Abstract

Background: Tracking the spread of antimicrobial-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae is a major priority for national surveillance programmes. Objectives: We investigate whether WGS and simultaneous analysis of multiple resistance determinants can be used to predict antimicrobial susceptibilities to the level of MICs in N. gonorrhoeae. Methods: WGS was used to identify previously reported potential resistance determinants in 681 N. gonorrhoeae isolates, from England, the USA and Canada, with phenotypes for cefixime, penicillin, azithromycin, ciprofloxacin and tetracycline determined as part of national surveillance programmes. Multivariate linear regression models were used to identify genetic predictors of MIC. Model performance was assessed using leave-one-out cross-validation. Results: Overall 1785/3380 (53%) MIC values were predicted to the nearest doubling dilution and 3147 (93%) within ±1 doubling dilution and 3314 (98%) within ±2 doubling dilutions. MIC prediction performance was similar across the five antimicrobials tested. Prediction models included the majority of previously reported resistance determinants. Applying EUCAST breakpoints to MIC predictions, the overall very major error (VME; phenotypically resistant, WGS-prediction susceptible) rate was 21/1577 (1.3%, 95% CI 0.8%-2.0%) and the major error (ME; phenotypically susceptible, WGS-prediction resistant) rate was 20/1186 (1.7%, 1.0%-2.6%). VME rates met regulatory thresholds for all antimicrobials except cefixime and ME rates for all antimicrobials except tetracycline. Country of testing was a strongly significant predictor of MIC for all five antimicrobials. Conclusions: We demonstrate a WGS-based MIC prediction approach that allows reliable MIC prediction for five gonorrhoea antimicrobials. Our approach should allow reasonably precise prediction of MICs for a range of bacterial species.

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/jac/dkx067

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 195

Metadata

Authors
Eyre, D. W., De Silva, D., Cole, K., Peters, J., Cole, M. J., Grad, Y. H., Demczuk, W., Martin, I., Mulvey, M. R., Crook, D. W., Walker, A. S., Peto, T. E. A., & Paul, J.
Venue
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
Published
2017-03-10
Volume
72
Issue
7
Pages
1937-1947
ISSN
  • 0305-7453 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2091
OpenAlex
W2592025411
Cited by
195
References
2
FWCI
6.93
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: WGS to predict antibiotic MICs for Neisseria gonorrhoeae. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jac/dkx067
The paper
Eyre, D. W., De Silva, D., Cole, K., Peters, J., Cole, M. J., Grad, Y. H., Demczuk, W., Martin, I., Mulvey, M. R., Crook, D. W., Walker, A. S., Peto, T. E. A., & Paul, J. (2017). WGS to predict antibiotic MICs for Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkx067

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.