ArticleCritical care (London, England)2011
Is (1→3)-β-D-glucan the missing link from bedside assessment to pre-emptive therapy of invasive candidiasis?
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Invasive Candidiasis in the Intensive Care Unit: Where Are We Now?Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- [Not Available].Annals of burns and fire disasters · 2015Article
- Invasive Candida infections in patients of a medical intensive care unit: attempt of improving diagnosis by quantifying the colonization.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2015Observational
- Performance of galactomannan, beta-d-glucan, Aspergillus lateral-flow device, conventional culture, and PCR tests with bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
- Review
- An Observational Study on Early Empiric versus Culture-Directed Antifungal Therapy in Critically Ill with Intra-Abdominal Sepsis.Critical care research and practice · 2014Article
- Why should we monitor (1-3)-β-D-glucan levels during invasive candidiasis? Just ask your ophthalmologist!Journal of clinical microbiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasive candidiasis is a frequent life-threatening complication in critically ill patients. Early diagnosis followed by prompt treatment aimed at improving outcome by minimizing unnecessary antifungal use remains a major challenge in the ICU setting. Timely patient selection thus plays a key role for clinically efficient and cost-effective management. Approaches combining clinical risk factors and Candida colonization data have improved our ability to identify such patients early. While the negative predictive value of scores and predicting rules is up to 95 to 99%, the positive predictive value is much lower, ranging between 10 and 60%. Accordingly, if a positive score or rule is used to guide the start of antifungal therapy, many patients may be treated unnecessarily. Candida biomarkers display higher positive predictive values; however, they lack sensitivity and are thus not able to identify all cases of invasive candidiasis. The (1→3)-β-D-glucan (BG) assay, a panfungal antigen test, is recommended as a complementary tool for the diagnosis of invasive mycoses in high-risk hemato-oncological patients. Its role in the more heterogeneous ICU population remains to be defined. More efficient clinical selection strategies combined with performant laboratory tools are needed in order to treat the right patients at the right time by keeping costs of screening and therapy as low as possible. The new approach proposed by Posteraro and colleagues in the previous issue of Critical Care meets these requirements. A single positive BG value in medical patients admitted to the ICU with sepsis and expected to stay for more than 5 days preceded the documentation of candidemia by 1 to 3 days with an unprecedented diagnostic accuracy. Applying this one-point fungal screening on a selected subset of ICU patients with an estimated 15 to 20% risk of developing candidemia is an appealing and potentially cost-effective approach. If confirmed by multicenter investigations, and extended to surgical patients at high risk of invasive candidiasis after abdominal surgery, this bayesian-based risk stratification approach aimed at maximizing clinical efficiency by minimizing health care resource utilization may substantially simplify the management of critically ill patients at risk of invasive candidiasis.
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.