Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21227994›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2011

Comparison of the broth microdilution (BMD) method of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing with the 24-hour CLSI BMD method for testing susceptibility of Candida species to fluconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole by use of epidemiological cutoff values.

M A Pfaller, A Espinel-Ingroff, L Boyken, R J Hollis, J Kroeger, S A Messer, S Tendolkar, D J Diekema

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Essential Oils in Respiratory Mycosis: A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Susceptibility Testing of Fungi to Antifungal Drugs.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Species distribution and in vitro antifungal susceptibility profiles of yeast isolates from invasive infections during a Portuguese multicenter survey.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2014
    Observational
  18. Article
  19. The effect of biomaterials and antifungals on biofilm formation by Candida species: a review.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012
    Review
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M A PfallerMedical Microbiology Division, C606 GH, Department of Pathology, University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA. michael-pfaller@uiowa.edu
A Espinel-Ingroff
L Boyken
R J Hollis
J Kroeger
S A Messer
S Tendolkar
D J Diekema
University of Iowa · USVirginia Commonwealth University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The antifungal broth microdilution (BMD) method of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) was compared with CLSI BMD method M27-A3 for fluconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole susceptibility testing of 1,056 isolates of Candida. The isolates were obtained in 2009 from more than 60 centers worldwide and included 560 isolates of C. albicans, 175 of C. glabrata, 162 of C. parapsilosis, 124 of C. tropicalis, and 35 of C. krusei. The overall essential agreement (EA) between EUCAST and CLSI results ranged from 96.9% (voriconazole) to 98.6% (fluconazole). The categorical agreement (CA) between methods and species of Candida was assessed using previously determined epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs). The ECVs (expressed as μg/ml) for fluconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole, respectively, were as follows: 0.12, 0.06, and 0.03 for C. albicans; 32, 2, and 0.5 for C. glabrata; 2, 0.25, and 0.12 for C. parapsilosis; 2, 0.12, and 0.06 for C. tropicalis; 64, 0.5, and 0.5 for C. krusei. Excellent CA was observed for all comparisons between the EUCAST and CLSI results for fluconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole, respectively, for each species: 98.9%, 93.6%, and 98.6% for C. albicans; 96.0%, 98.9%, and 93.7% for C. glabrata; 90.8%, 98.1%, and 98.1% for C. parapsilosis; 99.2%, 99.2%, and 96.8% for C. tropicalis; 97.1%, 97.1%, and 97.1% for C. krusei. We demonstrate high levels of EA and CA between the CLSI and EUCAST BMD methods for testing of triazoles against Candida when the MICs were determined after 24 h and ECVs were used to differentiate wild-type (WT) from non-WT strains. These results provide additional data in favor of the harmonization of these two methods.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsCandidaCandidiasisFluconazoleHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPyrimidinesTriazolesVoriconazoleAntifungal AgentsFluconazoleposaconazolePyrimidinesTriazolesVoriconazole

Identifiers

PMID21227994
PMCPMC3067722
OpenAlexW2113460689

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.