ArticleInternational journal of hematology2008
Treatment of invasive fungal infections in clinical practice: a multi-centre survey on customary dosing, treatment indications, efficacy and safety of voriconazole.
Article in International journal of hematology, 2008. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Two Voriconazole Formulations after Intravenous Infusion in Healthy Korean Volunteers.Infection & chemotherapy · 2020Article
- Tolerability profile of the current antifungal armoury.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2018Review
- Voriconazole and its clinical potential in the prophylaxis of systemic fungal infection in patients with hematologic malignancies: a perspective review.Therapeutic advances in hematology · 2013Article
- Voriconazole treatment of invasive aspergillosis: real-world versus health-economic model results.Clinical drug investigation · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasive fungal infections are frequent and often deadly complications in patients with malignant hematological diseases. Voriconazole is a third generation triazole antifungal with broad activity against most clinically relevant fungal pathogens. Clinical practice often deviates from insights gained from controlled randomized trials. We conducted a multi-centre survey to evaluate efficacy, safety, treatment indications and dosing of voriconazole outside clinical trials. Patients receiving voriconazole were documented via electronic data capturing. An analysis was conducted after submission of 100 episodes from September 2004 to November 2005. Voriconazole was administered for suspected or proven invasive fungal infection (IFI) (57%), as empirical treatment in patients with fever of unknown origin (21%) and secondary (19%) as well as primary (3%) prophylaxis of IFI. Investigators' assessment of fungal infection often diverted from EORTC/MSG 2002 criteria. A favorable response was reported in 61.4% for suspected or proven IFI and 52.4% for empirical treatment. Mortality was 15%, 26.7% of which was attributable to IFI. Breakthrough fungal infections occurred in four (21.1%) patients with voriconazole as secondary prophylaxis. Toxicity and adverse events comprised elevated liver enzymes and visual disturbances. Although indications frequently deviated from clinical evidence and legal approval, voriconazole showed efficacy and safety, comparable to major controlled clinical trials. Data from this survey demonstrate the difficulty of putting drugs to their approved use in IFI.
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.