ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2005
Flow cytometry susceptibility testing for the antifungal caspofungin.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antifungal Susceptibility Testing: Current Approaches.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2020Review
- Recent trends in molecular diagnostics of yeast infections: from PCR to NGS.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2019Review
- Comparison of the Etest and a rapid flow cytometry-based method with the reference CLSI broth microdilution protocol M27-A3 for the echinocandin susceptibility testing of Candida spp.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012Article
- Susceptibility tests of oropharyngeal Candida albicans from egyptian patients to fluconazole determined by three methods.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2012Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid antifungal susceptibility testing for the antifungal agent caspofungin can be performed using flow cytometry (FC). An FC procedure using acridine orange provided minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) results within 7 to 9 h which were compared with results obtained using the NCCLS M27-A2 protocol. To evaluate the consistency of this method, susceptibility testing using caspofungin was performed using 73 isolates of eight different species of Candida from various clinical samples in Central California. Macrotiter or microdilution tests were performed according to the NCCLS M27-A2 protocol, and the MICs were compared to those provided by our flow cytometry method. All isolates tested had results within the sensitive interpretive category, and 90% of the results compared within 1 dilution, showing excellent agreement between the methods. The MIC at which 50% of the isolates tested were inhibited (MIC50) and the MIC90 of caspofungin for all eight Candida species were within 1 dilution. This flow cytometer 7-h protocol for testing the antifungal susceptibility of Candida species to caspofungin provided results equivalent to those obtained with the M27-A2 protocol.
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.