ArticleAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2025
Antimicrobial susceptibility of Legionella gormanii: species-specific ECOFFs, distinct MICs for rifampin versus Legionella pneumophila.
Article in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLegionella gormanii (L. gormanii) is an emerging pathogen causing legionellosis, yet it is much less studied than the predominant species, L. pneumophila. Clinical treatment guidelines for legionellosis are primarily based on data from L. pneumophila and recommend macrolides and fluoroquinolones. However, the intrinsic antimicrobial susceptibility of L. gormanii is not well-defined, creating uncertainty about whether these guidelines are directly applicable. Establishing a baseline understanding of its susceptibility patterns is a prerequisite for effective epidemiological surveillance and for identifying non-wild-type resistance. This study aims to address this fundamental knowledge gap by characterizing the in vitro susceptibility profiles of a large collection of environmental L. gormanii isolates.
methodsThis study systematically evaluated the in vitro activity of ten representative antimicrobials against 207 environmental L. gormanii isolates collected in China between 2019 and 2021. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined by the broth microdilution (BMD) method, and species-specific epidemiological cutoff values (ECOFFs) were established using the ECOFFinder tool.
resultsMost tested agents demonstrated good in vitro activity. Rifampin was the most potent agent, while clarithromycin was the most active macrolide. Conversely, tetracyclines showed limited activity. Comparative analysis revealed that L. gormanii exhibited markedly higher MICs for rifampin (approximately 9.58-fold) than typically reported for L. pneumophila. Species-specific ECOFFs were determined for nine antimicrobials: rifampin (0.016 mg/L); ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and clarithromycin (0.063 mg/L); moxifloxacin (0.125 mg/L); erythromycin (0.25 mg/L); azithromycin (0.5 mg/L); trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (4 mg/L); and tigecycline (16 mg/L).
conclusionsThis study establishes the first large-scale susceptibility dataset and species-specific ECOFFs for L. gormanii. The findings highlight key inter-species differences in susceptibility, particularly for rifampin, underscoring that treatment paradigms cannot be safely extrapolated from L. pneumophila. These ECOFFs provide a critical tool for surveillance of non-wild-type resistance. However, these data, derived from environmental isolates, are intended for epidemiological and hypothesis-generating purposes and must be supplemented with clinical and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) studies before informing changes to clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.