Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22768289›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2012

New strategy for rapid diagnosis and characterization of fungal infections: the example of corneal scrapings.

Pablo Goldschmidt, Sandrine Degorge, Patricia Che Sarria, Djida Benallaoua, Oudy Semoun, Vincent Borderie, Laurent Laroche, Christine Chaumeil

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Recent Perspectives in the Management of Fungal Keratitis.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  9. Evaluation of a Novel Mitochondrial Pan-Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Article
  10. First Molecular Report ofThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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.

Pablo GoldschmidtCentre Hospitalier National d'Ophtalmologie des Quinze-Vingts, Paris, France. pablogol@aol.com
Sandrine Degorge
Patricia Che Sarria
Djida Benallaoua
Oudy Semoun
Vincent Borderie
Laurent Laroche
Christine Chaumeil
Centre hospitalier national d'ophtalmologie des Quinze-Vingts · FRHôpital Saint-Louis · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe prognosis of people infected with Fungi especially immunocompromised depends on rapid and accurate diagnosis to capitalize on time administration of specific treatments. However, cultures produce false negative results and nucleic-acid amplification techniques require complex post-amplification procedures to differentiate relevant fungal types. The objective of this work was to develop a new diagnostic strategy based on real-time polymerase-chain reaction high-resolution melting analysis (PCR-HRM) that a) detects yeasts and filamentous Fungi, b) differentiates yeasts from filamentous Fungi, and c) discriminates among relevant species of yeasts.

methodsPCR-HRM detection limits and specificity were assessed with a) isolated strains; b) human blood samples experimentally infected with Fungi; c) blood experimentally infected with other infectious agents; d) corneal scrapings from patients with suspected fungal keratitis (culture positive and negative) and e) scrapings from patients with suspected bacterial, viral or Acanthamoeba infections. The DNAs were extracted and mixed with primers diluted in the MeltDoctor® HRM Master Mix in 2 tubes, the first for yeasts, containing the forward primer CandUn (5'CATGCCTGTTTGAGCGTC) and the reverse primer FungUn (5'TCCTCCGCTT ATTGATATGCT) and the second for filamentous Fungi, containing the forward primer FilamUn (5'TGCCTGTCCGAGCGTCAT) and FungUn. Molecular probes were not necessary. The yields of DNA extraction and the PCR inhibitors were systematically monitored.

resultsPCR-HRM detected 0.1 Colony Forming Units (CFU)/µl of yeasts and filamentous Fungi, differentiated filamentous Fungi from yeasts and discriminated among relevant species of yeasts. PCR-HRM performances were higher than haemoculture and sensitivity and specificity was 100% for culture positive samples, detecting and characterizing Fungi in 7 out 10 culture negative suspected fungal keratitis.

conclusionsPCR-HRM appears as a new, sensitive, specific and inexpensive test that detects Fungi and differentiates filamentous Fungi from yeasts. It allows direct fungal detection from clinical samples and experimentally infected blood in less than 2.30 h after DNA extraction.

Indexed as

DNA, FungalEye Infections, FungalFemaleFungiHumansKeratitisMalePolymerase Chain ReactionDNA, Fungal

Identifiers

PMID22768289
PMCPMC3388096
OpenAlexW2063521456

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.