ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2006
Evaluation of amphotericin B interpretive breakpoints for Candida bloodstream isolates by correlation with therapeutic outcome.
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 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
42 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Tuberculosis: Unlocking the Antifungal Potential of Novel Isoniazid Derivatives against Non-ACS omega · 2026Article
- Recent innovations and challenges in the treatment of fungal infections.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Review
- Identification of an active RNAi pathway inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Antifungal susceptibility testing following the CLSI M27 document, along with the measurement of MFC/MIC ratio, could be the optimal approach to detect amphotericin B resistance inAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2024Article
- Antifungal Activity of Bulgarian Rose Damascena Oil against Vaginitis-Causing Opportunistic Fungi.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2023Article
- Article
- Role and Interpretation of Antifungal Susceptibility Testing for the Management of Invasive Fungal Infections.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Amphotericin B and Other Polyenes-Discovery, Clinical Use, Mode of Action and Drug Resistance.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Antifungal resistance in patients with Candidaemia: a retrospective cohort study.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Preclinical Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Antifungal Activity of Liposomal Amphotericin B.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2019Review
- The changes of antifungal susceptibilities caused by the phenotypic switching of Candida species in 229 patients with vulvovaginal candidiasis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2019Article
- Fungal persister cells: The basis for recalcitrant infections?PLoS pathogens · 2018Review
- Antifungal Susceptibility and Clinical Outcome in Neonatal Candidiasis.The Pediatric infectious disease journal · 2018Article
- Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis: A Narrative Review.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Diagnosis and management of a fatal case of sepsis caused byMedical mycology case reports · 2018Article
- Virulence factors, antifungal susceptibility and molecular mechanisms of azole resistance among Candida parapsilosis complex isolates recovered from clinical specimens.Journal of biomedical science · 2017Article
- Multidrug-Resistant Candida haemulonii and C. auris, Tel Aviv, Israel.Emerging infectious diseases · 2017Article
- Enhanced Killing and Antibiofilm Activity of Encapsulated Cinnamaldehyde againstFrontiers in microbiology · 2017Article
- Emergence of azole-resistant Candida parapsilosis causing bloodstream infection: results from laboratory-based sentinel surveillance in South Africa.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2016Article
- Unveiling the Synergistic Interaction Between Liposomal Amphotericin B and Colistin.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One hundred seven Candida bloodstream isolates (51 C. albicans, 24 C. glabrata, 13 C. parapsilosis, 13 C. tropicalis, 2 C. dubliniensis, 2 C. krusei, and 2 C. lusitaniae strains) from patients treated with amphotericin B alone underwent in vitro susceptibility testing against amphotericin B using five different methods. Fifty-four isolates were from patients who failed treatment, defined as death 7 to 14 days after the incident candidemia episode, having persistent fever of >or=5 days' duration after the date of the incident candidemia, or the recurrence of fever after two consecutive afebrile days while on antifungal treatment. MICs were determined by using the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (formally National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards) broth microdilution procedure with two media and by using Etest. Minimum fungicidal concentrations (MFCs) were also measured in two media. Broth microdilution tests with RPMI 1640 medium generated a restricted range of MICs (0.125 to 1 microg/ml); the corresponding MFC values ranged from 0.5 to 4 microg/ml. Broth microdilution tests with antibiotic medium 3 produced a broader distribution of MIC and MFC results (0.015 to 0.25 microg/ml and 0.06 to 2 microg/ml, respectively). Etest produced the widest distribution of MICs (0.094 to 2 microg/ml). However, none of the test formats studied generated results that significantly correlated with therapeutic success or failure.
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.