About this Research Topic
Currently accepted data postulates that time to antibiotic therapy is paramount in positively impacting patients afflicted by infections. While the exact extent and clinical specifics of this hypothesis remain to be clarified, current culture-based techniques for determining antimicrobial susceptibilities are usually too slow to hit the single-digit hourly turnaround times commonly required for maximum clinical benefit. Typically this common problem is answered through genotypic detection of genes/loci associated with resistance. These methods feature many strengths, including sensitivity and rapidity. However, they also feature many weaknesses, including false positives, discrepancies with reference phenotypic susceptibility testing methods, and lack of detection of targets not included in their design.
This can often lead to confusion and an inevitably broad treatment course. Hence a solution may include testing that combines both the surety/granularity of phenotypic methods with the rapidity of genotypic methods. This idea has been seized on by many vendors, both legacy and new start-ups and a variety of methods have been proposed or are currently under development. However, the current literature is very heavily weighted towards studies either paid for or performed directly by those same vendors. Further, the relative paucity of data exists for the application and clinical impact of these methods on real-world patients.
Hence the goals of this research topic are to fill the gap in that literature. We aim to gather independent publications on novel techniques in phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing performed and resulted in a rapid timeframe. Further, we aim to recruit publications on the application of those methods clinically, including endpoints in antibiotic choice, diagnostic choice, cost-effectiveness, length of stay, morbidity/mortality, etc.
Submissions are welcome across any organism and can take the form of original research, method, review, or other original works on the topic.
Topic Editor Prof. Michael Jacobs received financial support from: Specific Diagnostics, Mountain View, CA, and Avails Medical, Menlo Park, CA. All other Topic Editors declare no competing interests.
This can often lead to confusion and an inevitably broad treatment course. Hence a solution may include testing that combines both the surety/granularity of phenotypic methods with the rapidity of genotypic methods. This idea has been seized on by many vendors, both legacy and new start-ups and a variety of methods have been proposed or are currently under development. However, the current literature is very heavily weighted towards studies either paid for or performed directly by those same vendors. Further, the relative paucity of data exists for the application and clinical impact of these methods on real-world patients.
Hence the goals of this research topic are to fill the gap in that literature. We aim to gather independent publications on novel techniques in phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing performed and resulted in a rapid timeframe. Further, we aim to recruit publications on the application of those methods clinically, including endpoints in antibiotic choice, diagnostic choice, cost-effectiveness, length of stay, morbidity/mortality, etc.
Submissions are welcome across any organism and can take the form of original research, method, review, or other original works on the topic.
Topic Editor Prof. Michael Jacobs received financial support from: Specific Diagnostics, Mountain View, CA, and Avails Medical, Menlo Park, CA. All other Topic Editors declare no competing interests.
Keywords: Susceptibility Testing, Antimicrobial Resistance, Antimicrobial Stewardship, Diagnostic Stewardship, AST
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
