Your LIMS reports what grew. It doesn't tell the physician what to do about it.
CORE-ABR turns a molecular pathogen panel into an organism-aware antibiogram, a scenario-based therapy recommendation, and a claim coded well enough to survive an audit. It runs inside your laboratory, and every report carries your name.
Switch on a resistance gene and watch the grid answer
One organism, one wound specimen. The engine already knows the intrinsic biology; the genes tell it what else to remove.
Resistance genes detected
Toggle each one. Nothing else about the specimen changes.
| Agent | Activity | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Beta-lactams | ||
| Oxacillin | ||
| Cefazolin | ||
| Cephalexin | ||
| Ceftaroline | ||
| Tetracyclines | ||
| Doxycycline | ||
| Minocycline | ||
| Omadacycline | ||
| Tigecycline | ||
| Macrolide / lincosamide | ||
| Clindamycin | ||
| Erythromycin | ||
| Reserve agents | ||
| Linezolid | ||
| Vancomycin | ||
| Urinary agents | ||
| Nitrofurantoin | — | Not applicable to this site |
| Fosfomycin | — | Not applicable to this site |
The gap
Detection is the easy half
Molecular panels got fast and cheap. What reaches the ordering physician mostly didn't change — a list of organisms and a list of genes, with the interpretation left as an exercise. That gap is where your report stops being useful and starts looking like everyone else's.
What a conventional LIMS emits
- Organisms present or absent
- Resistance genes detected or not detected
- No connection drawn between the two
- Intrinsic resistance left for the reader to recall
- Agents listed regardless of specimen site
- Diagnosis coding handled somewhere else, later
- A layout that looks like every other lab's
What CORE-ABR emits
- Organisms quantified, with cycles above the detection limit
- Each detected gene mapped to the agents it removes
- Intrinsic biology encoded per organism
- Agents gated to the specimen site
- Colonizer likelihood characterized, not left implied
- Every target listed, including those tested and not detected
- Diagnosis codes checked before the report leaves
In action
One report, three readers
Most reports pick an audience. A summary that satisfies a nurse practitioner buries the wound specialist's grid; a full antibiogram loses the prescriber who needed one line. This one is built so each reader lands on the page they came for — and the record holds everything either of them might be asked about later.
LOGO Your Laboratory Name | Laboratory Director, MD | CLIA ID 00X0000000
- Staphylococcus aureus — Medium, >1.0×106 GCE/mL, Ct 24.40 (7.1 cycles above LOD)
Resistance genes detected: tetB / tetM, ermB / ermC. mecA / mecC not detected.
Gram-positive coccus; common cause of cellulitis and abscess. Quantity and exposed fat layer are consistent with infection rather than surface colonization. Ensure drainage for purulent disease.
| Scenario | First line | Alternative | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uncomplicated wound, outpatient | Cephalexin (PO) | Amoxicillin-clavulanate (PO) | 7–10 d |
| Systemic signs or deep infection | Cefazolin IV | Ceftaroline IV | 10–14 d (source control dependent) |
Resolved before release. L97.812 carries the required site and severity characters. E11.622 pairs the diabetic condition to the ulcer. Resistance findings are supporting, not primary — Z16.29 added.
Molecular detection does not replace phenotypic susceptibility testing. Absence of a detected resistance gene does not establish susceptibility. This report supports physician decision-making and does not replace clinical judgment, physical examination, or standard diagnostic evaluation. Page 1 of 3.
LOGO Sample, Patient | SAMPLE-0001 | Collected 03/04/2026
Organism-aware grading. Intrinsic biology, detected resistance genes, and specimen-site rules are applied to every agent. tetB / tetM and ermB / ermC detected; mecA / mecC not detected.
Penicillins
Cephalosporins — IV
Cephalosporins — oral
Beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations
Carbapenems and monobactam
Aminoglycosides
Tetracyclines
Fluoroquinolones
Folate antagonists
Macrolides and lincosamides
Oxazolidinones
Glycopeptides and lipopeptides
Urinary agents
Siderophore cephalosporin
Grading incorporates intrinsic biology, detected resistance genes, and site-specific rules. Molecular detection does not replace phenotypic susceptibility testing. Page 2 of 3.
LOGO Sample, Patient | SAMPLE-0001 | Collected 03/04/2026
| Target | Ct value | LOD | Cycles > LOD | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Staphylococcus aureus | 24.40 | 31.50 | 7.10 | Medium |
| Target | Result | Mechanism |
|---|---|---|
| tetB / tetM | Detected | Ribosomal protection and efflux |
| ermB / ermC | Detected | MLSb — ribosomal methylation |
Every target interrogated on this panel, so the reader never has to ask whether something was looked for.
| Organisms Acinetobacter baumannii · Aspergillus fumigatus / flavus · Blastomyces dermatitidis · Candida albicans · Candida glabrata / tropicalis · Citrobacter freundii · Enterobacter aerogenes / cloacae · Enterococcus species · Enterovirus · Escherichia coli · Fusarium oxysporum / solani · Haemophilus influenzae · Herpes type 1 · Herpes type 2 · Klebsiella pneumoniae / oxytoca · Mycoplasma hominis / genitalium · Proteus mirabilis / vulgaris · Pseudomonas aeruginosa · Staphylococcus epidermidis · Streptococcus agalactiae · Streptococcus pneumoniae · Streptococcus pyogenes · Cutibacterium acnes · Varicella-zoster virus |
| Resistance markers mecA / mecC (MRSA) · vanA / vanB · Class A beta-lactamase (CTX-M) · Class A beta-lactamase (KPC / SHV) · Class C AmpC · Class D OXA · Class B MBL (IMP / VIM) · qnrA / qnrB · qnrS · sul1 / sul2 · dfrA1 / dfrA5 |
Method: qPCR. Organisms are quantified; resistance genes are reported qualitatively as detected or not detected. Molecular detection does not replace phenotypic susceptibility testing, and absence of a detected resistance gene does not establish susceptibility. Page 3 of 3.
The genes did the work
tetB / tetM removed doxycycline and minocycline while omadacycline and tigecycline held — both were designed to evade ribosomal protection. ermB / ermC removed clindamycin and the macrolides.
What wasn't found still matters
mecA not detected kept the beta-lactams in play, so first line is cephalexin rather than a reserve agent. Every target interrogated is named, so nobody has to wonder whether it was on the panel.
Quantity informs the read
Cycles above the detection limit are reported alongside the organism, so a faint detection reads differently from a dominant one.
The claim was checked first
Site, severity, laterality and required characters are validated against the indication before the report is released, not after the denial arrives.
Denials
Most molecular denials are coding, not medicine
The wound families are unforgiving. L89 needs site and stage. L97 needs site and severity. L02, L03, T81 and T79 need laterality and a seventh character. Screening-only codes will not carry medical necessity on their own. Every one of those is a clean claim lost to a missing character.
CORE-ABR validates the diagnosis coding against the indication while the report is being built, flags what is missing, and prints the coding rationale on the report itself. When an auditor asks why a test was performed and what supported it, the answer is already in the document.
Your laboratory
It runs in your building, and it carries your name
Nothing leaves your lab
The software runs locally on your infrastructure. Specimen data, accession data, client lists and case mix stay where they are. There is no vendor cloud holding your patient data, no transit of PHI, and nothing for us to see about what you run or who you run it for.
White labeled end to end
Your logo, your color scheme, your laboratory name and director on every page. The physician receiving the report sees your laboratory doing sophisticated work, because that is what is happening.
Configured to your panel
Organism targets, resistance genes, specimen types and site rules are configured to the assay you actually run — not to somebody else's menu. Initial setup covers this customization.
Straight to the fax
Connects to your eFax service and delivers finished reports directly to the ordering provider. Most physicians still receive results by fax; this removes the manual step between the report and their hands.
Built inside a working laboratory
The grading logic was written by people who run the assay, read the reports, and answer the phone when a physician has a question about one. That is why it encodes intrinsic resistance, site gating and colonizer likelihood — those came from practice, not from a specification.
Pricing
Setup, then pay per report
Configuration to your panel
A one-time fee covering panel mapping, site rules, branding, and delivery configuration. You start generating reports on your own assay, not a template.
Billed monthly
A low fee for each report generated, invoiced at month end or charged to a card on file. No annual commitment, no seat licensing, and cost that tracks the volume you actually run.
See it run against your own panel
A short working session: we walk a report end to end, map it to the assay you run, and show you what your physicians would receive.