ReviewClinical microbiology reviews2006
Interpretive breakpoints for fluconazole and Candida revisited: a blueprint for the future of antifungal susceptibility testing.
Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 95 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
95 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Candidiasis: 2016 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2016Guideline
- A research agenda on the management of intra-abdominal candidiasis: results from a consensus of multinational experts.Intensive care medicine · 2013Guideline
- Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2009Guideline
- Monitoring and impact of fluconazole serum and cerebrospinal fluid concentration in HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis-infected patients.HIV medicine · 2010Trial
- Can Fluconazole Be Used to Treat Non-Resistant Candida (Candidozyma) auris Infections? Preclinical Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Data From a Galleria mellonella Infection Model.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2026Article
- The rheological properties ofBiofilm · 2026Article
- Genetic Insights into the Rheological Phenotype of Candida albicans Biofilms.Research square · 2026Article
- The characterization of a rhamnosylated triterpenic saponin fromFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activity of Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents (NADESs) Based on Primary and Specialized Plant Metabolites.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A case of pyelonephritis and bacteremia caused by Candida glabrata in a patient on sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, successfully treated with micafungin.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2025Article
- Variations in virulence factors, antifungal susceptibility and extracellular polymeric substance compositions of cryptic and uncommon Candida species from oral candidiasis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Vaginal mycobiome characteristics and therapeutic strategies in vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC): differentiating pathogenic species and microecological features for stratified treatment.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2025Review
- Hotspot gene conversion between FKS1 and FKS2 in echinocandin resistant Candida glabrata serial isolates.npj antimicrobials and resistance · 2025Article
- Review
- Molecular and Clinical Features of Fluconazole Non-susceptibleAnnals of laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Fungal diversity and drug susceptibility of the oral mycobiome of domestic dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- The importance of antimicrobial resistance in medical mycology.Nature communications · 2022Review
- A New Variant of Mutational and Polymorphic Signatures in theInfection and drug resistance · 2022Article
- Antibiofilm Activity ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Article
35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
Developing interpretive breakpoints for any given organism-drug combination requires integration of the MIC distribution, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters, and the relationship between in vitro activity and outcome from both in vivo and clinical studies. Previously, the Subcommittee for Antifungal Testing of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI [formerly National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards]) proposed MIC interpretive breakpoints for fluconazole and Candida spp. These breakpoints were considered to be somewhat weak, because the clinical data supporting them came largely from mucosal infections and there were very few infections involving strains with elevated fluconazole MICs. We readdress the issue of fluconazole breakpoints for Candida by using published clinical and microbiologic data to provide further validation of the breakpoints proposed by the CLSI in 1997. We also address interpretive breakpoints for agar disk diffusion testing of fluconazole. The MIC distribution for fluconazole was determined with a collection of 13,338 clinical isolates. The overall MIC at which 90% of the isolates were inhibited was 8 microg/ml: 91% were susceptible (S) at a MIC of <or=8 microg/ml and 3% were resistant (R) (MIC >or= 64 microg/ml). Similar results were obtained for 2,190 isolates from randomized clinical trials. Analysis of available data for 1,295 patient-episode-isolate events (692 represented mucosal infections and 603 represented invasive infections) from 12 published clinical studies demonstrated an overall success rate of 77%, including 85% for those episodes in which the fluconazole MIC was <or=8 microg/ml, 67% for those episodes in which the MIC was 16 to 32 microg/ml, and 42% for those episodes with resistant (MIC >or= 64 microg/ml) isolates. Pharmacodynamic analysis demonstrated a strong relationship between MIC, fluconazole dose, and outcome. A dose/MIC ratio of approximately 25 was supportive of the following susceptibility breakpoints for fluconazole and Candida spp.: S, MIC <or= 8 microg/ml; susceptible-dose dependent (SDD), MIC = 16 to 32 microg/ml; R, MIC >or= 64 microg/ml. The corresponding disk test breakpoints are as follows: S, >or=19 mm; SDD, 15 to 18 mm; R, <or=14 mm.
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.