Trial reportPloS one2012
New strategy for rapid diagnosis and characterization of fungal infections: the example of corneal scrapings.
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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Alternative photosensitizer penetration depth evaluation in ex vivo human eyes for photodynamic antimicrobial therapy.Therapeutic delivery · 2025Article
- Nanoemulsion Carriers for Ocular Fungal Infection: Main Emphasis on Keratomycosis.Pharmaceutical nanotechnology · 2025Review
- Diversity of Anaplasmataceae Transmitted by Ticks (Ixodidae) and the First Molecular Evidence ofMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- Recent updates on ocular disease management with ophthalmic ointments.Therapeutic delivery · 2024Review
- A comprehensive review on recent nanosystems for enhancing antifungal activity of fenticonazole nitrate from different routes of administration.Drug delivery · 2023Review
- Diagnostic methods for the etiological assessment of infectious corneal pathology (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2022Review
- Recent Perspectives in the Management of Fungal Keratitis.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Evaluation of a Novel Mitochondrial Pan-Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- First Molecular Report ofThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2019Article
- Fungal keratitis: study of increasing trend and common determinants.Nepal journal of epidemiology · 2017Article
- Development of Candida-Specific Real-Time PCR Assays for the Detection and Identification of Eight Medically Important Candida Species.Microbiology insights · 2016Article
- Rapid identification of medically important Candida isolates using high resolution melting analysis.PloS one · 2015Article
- Differentiation of Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli Using Multiplex-PCR and High Resolution Melt Curve Analysis.PloS one · 2015Article
- Enzymatic treatment of specimens before DNA extraction directly influences molecular detection of infectious agents.PloS one · 2014Article
- Recent trends: Medical management of infectious keratitis.Oman journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.