ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2000
Determination of antifungal MICs by a rapid susceptibility assay.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anticancer and Antimicrobial Activities of New Cobalt and Zinc Complex-Derived Benzimidazole Containing Nitro or Methyl Groups.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Determination of Echinocandin MICs for Candida species in less than 8 hours: comparison of the rapid susceptibility assay with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute's broth microdilution assay.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2009Article
- Role for cell density in antifungal drug resistance in Candida albicans biofilms.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2007Article
- Antifungal effects on metabolite profiles of medically important yeast species measured by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2006Article
- Modified colorimetric assay for susceptibility testing of azole antifungal drugs against Candida species.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2004Article
- Modification of rapid susceptibility assay for antifungal susceptibility testing of Aspergillus fumigatus.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Article
- Antifungal susceptibility testing: practical aspects and current challenges.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2001Review
- Comparison of a new colorimetric assay with the NCCLS broth microdilution method (M-27A) for antifungal drug MIC determination.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2000Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A novel microtiter assay for antifungal susceptibility testing was developed. This method has several potential advantages over the M27-A assay of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. These include provision of MIC results within 6 to 19 h, graphical display of data, and the availability of objective quantitative endpoints. We refer to the method as the rapid susceptibility assay (RSA). RSA is based on substrate utilization by fungi in the presence of antifungal drugs. Substrate uptake is determined by a colorimetric method, which can be scored by analysis of data obtained from a microplate reader. Variables evaluated in the development of the RSA included inoculum size, incubation period, and efficacy with different classes of antifungal drugs and different yeast isolates. With the rapidly available and quantitative endpoints of the RSA, correlation of MICs and therapeutic drug doses can be evaluated more successfully than they can be evaluated by existing assays.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.