Vancomycin MICs for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Isolates Differ Based upon the Susceptibility Test Method Used
Open accessAbstract
Recent studies have questioned treatment of serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections with vancomycin because of treatment failures, despite vancomycin MICs in the susceptible category (MIC ≤ 2 μg/ml) ([2][1], [3][2], [5][3], [6][4], [7][5]). Some of these studies have
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The E-test method exhibits systematic biases towards higher or lower MIC values for certain microorganism-antimicrobial agent combinations.
“The E-test method has also been observed to exhibit systematic biases towards higher or lower MIC values for certain microorganism-antimicrobial agent combinations [74, 75].”
From Methods for screening and evaluation of antimicrobial activity: A review of protocols, advantages, and limitations (2024) · cites this paper as [75]
The Results report that Etest vancomycin MICs for MRSA isolates were consistently one twofold dilution higher than MICs from the comparison methods. This supports a systematic upward difference for one microorganism–antimicrobial combination, but the paper does not establish lower Etest MICs or differences across other combinations. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- [2]Hidayat, L. K., D. I. Hsu, R. Quist, K. A. Shriner, and A. Wong-Beringer. 2006. High-dose vancomycin therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Arch. Intern. Med. 166:2138-2144. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [3]Maclayton, D. O., K. J. Suda, K. A. Coval, C. B. York, and K. W. Garey. 2006. Case-control study of the relationship between MRSA bacteremia with a vancomycin MIC of 2 μg/mL and risk factors, costs, and outcomes in inpatients undergoing hemodialysis. Clin. Ther. 28:1208-1216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [4]Moise-Broder, P. A., A. Forrest, M. C. Birmingham, and J. J. Schentag. 2004. Pharmacodynamics of vancomycin and other antimicrobials in patients with Staphylococcus aureus lower respiratory tract infections. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 43:925-942. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [5]Moise-Broder, P. A., G. Sakoulas, G. M. Eliopoulos, J. J. Schentag, A. Forrest, and R. C. Moellering. 2004. Accessory gene regulator group II polymorphism in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is predictive of failure of vancomycin therapy. Clin. Infect. Dis. 15:1700-1705. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [6]Sakoulas, G., P. A. Moise-Broder, J. Schentag, A. Forrest, R. C. Moellering, and G. M. Eliopoulos. 2004. Relationship of MIC and bactericidal activity to efficacy of vancomycin for treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. J. Clin. Microbiol. 42:2398-2402. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [7]Soriano, A., F. Marco, J. A. Martinez, E. Pisos, M. Almela, V. P. Dimova, D. Alamo, M. Ortego, J. Lopez, and J. Mensa. 2008. Influence of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration on the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin. Infect. Dis. 15:193-200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Howden, B. P., Davies, J. K., Johnson, P. D. R., Stinear, T. P., & Grayson, M. L. (2010) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00042-09 · Cited by 962 · see citing works
Hossain, T. J. (2024) · European Journal of Microbiology and Immunology · doi:10.1556/1886.2024.00035 · Cited by 392 · see citing works
- Authors
- Prakash, V., Lewis, J. S., & Jorgensen, J. H.
- Affiliations
- Brooke Army Medical Center (US)
- The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
- Venue
- Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2008-12
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 4528-4528
- ISSN
- 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-6596
- PMC
- PMC2592869
- OpenAlex
- W2131393110
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 7.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Defense
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antibiotic Use and Resistance
- Keywords
- vancomycin, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, minimum inhibitory concentration, antimicrobial susceptibility testing, treatment failure, MRSA infection
- MeSH terms
- Anti-Bacterial Agents, Humans, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Staphylococcal Infections, Vancomycin, Bacteremia, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
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
