ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2005
In vitro activity of voriconazole against Prototheca wickerhamii: comparative evaluation of sensititre and NCCLS M27-A2 methods of detection.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Drug Susceptibility Profiling ofAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2023Article
- Review
- Protothecosis in the mucosa of the pharynx mimicking pharyngeal cancer in an immunocompetent individual: a case report.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2022Article
- Characterization of Prototheca zopfii Genotypes Isolated from Cases of Bovine Mastitis and Cow Barns in China.Mycopathologia · 2016Article
- Cutaneous protothecosis in a patient with hypogammaglobulinemia.Medical mycology case reports · 2013Article
- Human protothecosis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2007Review
- Voriconazole in the management of nosocomial invasive fungal infections.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2006Article
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 total of 104 Prototheca wickerhamii isolates and two control strains were tested for susceptibility to voriconazole using the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal plate and NCCLS reference method. Voriconazole was highly active against all isolates, with an MIC at which 90% of isolates were inhibited of < or = 0.5 microg/ml. Comparison of MICs obtained with the Sensititre product and the NCCLS method demonstrated agreement (100% +/- 2 log2 dilutions) between the two methods. Voriconazole may offer an option for the treatment of Prototheca sp. infections, and its efficacy should be established through clinical experience.
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.