ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2004
Intra- and interlaboratory study of a method for testing the antifungal susceptibilities of dermatophytes.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 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
33 citing papers in PubMed.
- A random comparative study of terbinafine versus griseofulvin in patients with tinea capitis in Western China.Mycopathologia · 2011Trial
- In Vitro Terbinafine Response and Minimum Inhibitory Concentration-Squalene Epoxidase Mutation Correlation in Tinea Cruris and Corporis: A Cross-Sectional Study.Current microbiology · 2026Article
- Emergence of resistant dermatophytosis caused byMedical mycology case reports · 2025Article
- Emergence of terbinafine-resistantJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- In vitro Antifungal Susceptibility Profile of ClinicalInfection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Antifungal Patterns of Dermatophytes: A Pathway to Antifungal Stewardship in Eastern India.Cureus · 2024Article
- Superficial Dermatophytosis across the World's Populations: Potential Benefits from Nanocarrier-Based Therapies and Rising Challenges.ACS omega · 2023Review
- Phylogeny, Antifungal Susceptibility, and Point Mutations ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Virulence and Antifungal Susceptibility ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Comparative evaluation of E-test and CLSI methods for Itraconazole, Fluconazole and Ketoconazole susceptibilities of Microsporum canis strains.Mycopathologia · 2020Article
- Synergistic Effects of Efflux Pump Modulators on the Azole Antifungal Susceptibility of Microsporum canis.Mycopathologia · 2020Article
- Comparison of Four Methods for theFrontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- A 9-Year Experience ofInfection and drug resistance · 2020Article
- Determination of antifungal minimum inhibitory concentration and its clinical correlation among treatment failure cases of dermatophytosis.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2019Article
- In Vitro Activity of Antifungal Drugs Against Trichophyton rubrum and Trichophyton mentagrophytes spp. by E-Test Method and Non-supplemented Mueller-Hinton Agar Plates.Mycopathologia · 2019Article
- Butenafine and analogues: An expeditious synthesis and cytotoxicity and antifungal activities.Journal of advanced research · 2018Article
- Antifungal drug susceptibility profile of clinically important dermatophytes and determination of point mutations in terbinafine-resistant isolates.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018Article
- Therapy and Antifungal Susceptibility Profile ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Silicon phthalocyanine 4 phototoxicity in Trichophyton rubrum.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2014Article
- Luliconazole demonstrates potent in vitro activity against dermatophytes recovered from patients with onychomycosis.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) M38-A standard for the susceptibility testing of conidium-forming filamentous fungi does not explicitly address the testing of dermatophytes. This multicenter study, involving six laboratories, investigated the MIC reproducibility of seven antifungal agents tested against 25 dermatophyte isolates (5 blinded pairs of five dermatophyte species per site for a total of 300 tests), using the method of dermatophyte testing developed at the Center for Medical Mycology, Cleveland, Ohio. The dermatophytes tested included Trichophyton rubrum, Trichophyton mentagrophytes, Trichophyton tonsurans, Epidermophyton floccosum, and Microsporum canis. Seven antifungals with activity against dermatophytes were tested, including ciclopirox, fluconazole, griseofulvin, itraconazole, posaconazole, terbinafine, and voriconazole. Interlaboratory MICs for all isolates were in 92 to 100% agreement at a visual endpoint reading of 50% inhibition as compared to the growth control and 88 to 99% agreement at a visual endpoint reading of 80% inhibition as compared to the growth control. Intralaboratory MICs between blinded pairs were in 97% agreement at a visual endpoint reading of 50% inhibition as compared to the growth control and 96% agreement at a visual endpoint reading of 80% inhibition as compared to the growth control. Data from this study support consideration of this method as an amendment to the NCCLS M38-A standard for the testing of dermatophytes.
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.