Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21961941›Full record

Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2011

Anidulafungin compared with fluconazole for treatment of candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis caused by Candida albicans: a multivariate analysis of factors associated with improved outcome.

Annette C Reboli, Andrew F Shorr, Coleman Rotstein, Peter G Pappas, Daniel H Kett, Haran T Schlamm, Arlene L Reisman, Pinaki Biswas, Thomas J Walsh

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00058682 (A Phase III, Double Blind, Randomized, Multi-Center Study of the Safety and Efficacy of Anidulafungin VS. Fluconazole in the Treatment of Patients With Candidemia and Other Forms of Invasive Candidiasis and Prevention of Complications), which is not on this map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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.

NCT00058682 phase3completednot on this map

A Phase III, Double Blind, Randomized, Multi-Center Study of the Safety and Efficacy of Anidulafungin VS. Fluconazole in the Treatment of Patients With Candidemia and Other Forms of Invasive Candidiasis and Prevention of Complications

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Cancer Institute (NCI)Ran2003 to 2005Enrolled248ConditionsCandida, CandidiasisArmsAnidulafungin
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. 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 · 2016
    Guideline
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. ISCCM Position Statement on the Management of Invasive Fungal Infections in the Intensive Care Unit.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Diagnosis and Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Microorganisms · 2020
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2019
    Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Annette C ReboliDivision of Infectious Diseases, Cooper Medical School of Rowan University, 2 Aquarium Drive, Suite 305, Camden, NJ 08103, USA. reboli@rowan.edu
Andrew F Shorr
Coleman Rotstein
Peter G Pappas
Daniel H Kett
Haran T Schlamm
Arlene L Reisman
Pinaki Biswas
Thomas J Walsh
Pfizer (United States) · USCooper Medical School of Rowan University · USMedStar Washington Hospital Center · USNew York Hospital Queens · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of Miami · USUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCandida albicans is the most common cause of candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis. Systemic infections due to C. albicans exhibit good susceptibility to fluconazole and echinocandins. However, the echinocandin anidulafungin was recently demonstrated to be more effective than fluconazole for systemic Candida infections in a randomized, double-blind trial among 245 patients. In that trial, most infections were caused by C. albicans, and all respective isolates were susceptible to randomized study drug. We sought to better understand the factors associated with the enhanced efficacy of anidulafungin and hypothesized that intrinsic properties of the antifungal agents contributed to the treatment differences.

methodsGlobal responses at end of intravenous study treatment in patients with C. albicans infection were compared post-hoc. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to predict response and to adjust for differences in independent baseline characteristics. Analyses focused on time to negative blood cultures, persistent infection at end of intravenous study treatment, and 6-week survival.

resultsIn total, 135 patients with C. albicans infections were identified. Among these, baseline APACHE II scores were similar between treatment arms. In these patients, global response was significantly better for anidulafungin than fluconazole (81.1% vs 62.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] for difference, 3.7-33.9). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the odds ratio for global response was 2.36 (95% CI, 1.06-5.25). Study treatment and APACHE II score were significant predictors of outcome. The most predictive logistic regression model found that the odds ratio for study treatment was 2.60 (95% CI, 1.14-5.91) in favor of anidulafungin, and the odds ratio for APACHE II score was 0.935 (95% CI, 0.885-0.987), with poorer responses associated with higher baseline APACHE II scores. Anidulafungin was associated with significantly faster clearance of blood cultures (log-rank p < 0.05) and significantly fewer persistent infections (2.7% vs 13.1%; p < 0.05). Survival through 6 weeks did not differ between treatment groups.

conclusionsIn patients with C. albicans infection, anidulafungin was more effective than fluconazole, with more rapid clearance of positive blood cultures. This suggests that the fungicidal activity of echinocandins may have important clinical implications.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00058682.

Indexed as

AnidulafunginAntifungal AgentsCandida albicansCandidiasis, InvasiveEchinocandinsFluconazoleHumansMultivariate AnalysisSurvival AnalysisTreatment OutcomeAnidulafunginAntifungal AgentsEchinocandinsFluconazole

Identifiers

PMID21961941
PMCPMC3203347
OpenAlexW2005529120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.