Trial reportCornea2012
Organism, minimum inhibitory concentration, and outcome in a fungal corneal ulcer clinical trial.
Trial report in Cornea, 2012. 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.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medical interventions for fungal keratitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Effect of Oral Voriconazole on Fungal Keratitis in the Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trial II (MUTT II): A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA ophthalmology · 2016Trial
- Changing Azole Resistance: A Secondary Analysis of the MUTT I Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA ophthalmology · 2016Trial
- Association of pretreatment with antifungal medication and fungal resistance in the mycotic ulcer treatment trial I.JAMA ophthalmology · 2015Trial
- Association between in vitro susceptibility to natamycin and voriconazole and clinical outcomes in fungal keratitis.Ophthalmology · 2014Trial
- In vitro susceptibility of filamentous fungal isolates from a corneal ulcer clinical trial.American journal of ophthalmology · 2014Trial
- Expert prior elicitation and Bayesian analysis of the Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trial I.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2013Trial
- The mycotic ulcer treatment trial: a randomized trial comparing natamycin vs voriconazole.JAMA ophthalmology · 2013Trial
- Moxifloxacin susceptibility mediates the relationship between causative organism and clinical outcome in bacterial keratitis.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2013Trial
- Microscopic evaluation, molecular identification, antifungal susceptibility, and clinical outcomes in fusarium, Aspergillus and, dematiaceous keratitis.BioMed research international · 2013Trial
- Emerging Ocular Pathogen Resistance and Clinically Used Solutions: A Problem That Is More than Meets the Eye.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Recent Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment Approaches in Fungal Keratitis: A Narrative Review.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Evaluation of antifungal susceptibility and clinical characteristics in fungal keratitis in a tertiary care center in North India.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Fungal Keratitis in the United Kingdom 2011-2020: A 10-Year Study.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Recent Perspectives in the Management of Fungal Keratitis.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Infectious keratitis: an update on epidemiology, causative microorganisms, risk factors, and antimicrobial resistance.Eye (London, England) · 2021Review
- Natamycin and Voriconazole Exhibit Synergistic Interactions with Nonantifungal Ophthalmic Agents againstAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2019Article
- Article
- Natamycin and Azithromycin Are SynergisticAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2018Article
- Evolution of Practice Patterns for the Treatment of Fungal Keratitis.JAMA ophthalmology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo analyze the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of isolates from fungal keratitis to natamycin and voriconazole and to assess the relationship between organism, MIC, and clinical outcome.
methodsData were collected as part of a randomized, controlled, double-masked clinical trial. Main outcome measures included best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, infiltrate/scar size, time to reepithelialization, and perforation. Speciation and analysis of MIC to natamycin and voriconazole were done according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute standards. The relationship between MIC and organism, organism and outcome measure, and each outcome measure and MIC were assessed.
resultsOf the 120 samples obtained in the trial, 84 isolates had an identifiable organism and were available for further analyses. Fusarium spp and Aspergillus spp were the most commonly isolated organisms. MIC was significantly different across the groups of organisms (P = 0.0001). A higher MIC was significantly associated with an increased likelihood of perforation [odds ratio (OR), 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-4.04; P = 0.04]. There was no significant association between MIC and 3-week visual acuity (OR, 0.058; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.13; P = 0.11), 3-month visual acuity (OR, 0.01; 95% CI,-0.08 to 1.04; P = 0.79), 3-week infiltrate/scar size (OR, 0.12, 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.27; P = 0.10), 3-month infiltrate/scar size (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.25; P = 0.09), or time to reepithelialization (hazards ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.98-1.45; P = 0.08).
conclusionA higher MIC was associated with an increased odds of perforation. The results of this study suggest that resistance to antifungal medication may be associated with worse outcomes in fungal keratitis.
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.