Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16189101›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2005

Efficacy and pharmacodynamics of flucytosine monotherapy in a nonneutropenic murine model of invasive aspergillosis.

D T A te Dorsthorst, P E Verweij, J F G M Meis, J W Mouton

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Genetic Diversity andAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2017
    Article
  5. Rodent Models of Invasive Aspergillosis due toFrontiers in microbiology · 2017
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

D T A te DorsthorstDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
P E Verweij
J F G M Meis
J W Mouton
Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis · NLRadboud University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The therapeutic efficacy of flucytosine (5FC) monotherapy and the pharmacodynamic index predictive of efficacy were evaluated in a nonneutropenic mouse model of acute invasive aspergillosis. Mice were infected intravenously with an Aspergillus fumigatus isolate (the median MICs of 5FC were 128 mug/ml under the standard condition, 0.5 microg/ml at pH 6.0, and 0.031 microg/ml at pH 5.0) 2 h prior to the start of therapy and were treated for 7 days with different 5FC dosing regimens. The total doses ranged from 50 to 800 mg/kg of body weight/day and were administered at 6-, 12-, and 24-h intervals. The efficacy was assessed by means of survival. The survival rates of the treatment groups ranged from 40 to 90%, while the survival rate of the control group was 20%. The efficacy found depended primarily on the total daily dose. However, the power of our sample size may have been too low to exclude an effect of dose fractionation. The pharmacodynamic index that most strongly correlated with the efficacy was the area under the serum concentration-time curve and MIC ratio (R(2) = 0.86). We conclude that 5FC monotherapy is efficacious in a murine Aspergillus fumigatus infection model.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, Outbred StrainsAntifungal AgentsArea Under CurveAspergillosisAspergillus fumigatusFemaleFlucytosineMiceSurvival RateAntifungal AgentsFlucytosine

Identifiers

PMID16189101
PMCPMC1251525
OpenAlexW2171797696

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.