ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2003
Evaluation of Etest method for determining voriconazole and amphotericin B MICs for 162 clinical isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of MIC Test Strip and Sensititre YeastOne with the CLSI and EUCAST Broth Microdilution Reference Methods forAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2020Article
- Antifungal Susceptibly Testing by Concentration Gradient Strip Etest Method for Fungal Isolates: A Review.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Article
- Comparison of different in vitro tests to detect Cryptococcus neoformans not susceptible to amphotericin B.Mycopathologia · 2015Article
- A high-throughput screening assay for fungicidal compounds against Cryptococcus neoformans.Journal of biomolecular screening · 2014Article
- Trends in antifungal drug susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans isolates obtained through population-based surveillance in South Africa in 2002-2003 and 2007-2008.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2011Article
- Evaluation of Etest method for determining isavuconazole MICs against Cryptococcus gattii and Cryptococcus neoformans.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2008Article
- Activities of available and investigational antifungal agents against rhodotorula species.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2005Article
- In vitro activity of amphotericin B, fluconazole and voriconazole against 162 Cryptococcus neoformans isolates from Africa and Cambodia.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The performance of the Etest for voriconazole and amphotericin B susceptibility testing of 162 isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans was assessed against the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) broth microdilution method. The NCCLS method employed RPMI 1640 broth medium, and MICs were read after incubation for 72 h at 35 degrees C. MICs were determined by Etest for all 162 isolates with RPMI 1640 agar containing 2% glucose (RPG agar) and were read after incubation for 72 h at 35 degrees C. The Etest results for both voriconazole and amphotericin B correlated well with reference MICs. Agreement was 94% for voriconazole and 99% for amphotericin B. When discrepancy was noted between the results obtained by Etest and broth microdilution for voriconazole, the Etest generally provided a higher MIC. The Etest method using RPG agar appears to be a useful method for determining the susceptibility of C. neoformans to voriconazole and amphotericin B.
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.