Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23253282›Full record

ReviewCellular microbiology2013

Two unlike cousins: Candida albicans and C. glabrata infection strategies.

Sascha Brunke, Bernhard Hube

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cellular microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

131 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Investigation of antifungal and antibiofilm activities of green synthesized silver nanoparticles against Candida glabrata.Biometals : an international journal on the role of metal ions in biology, biochemistry, and medicine · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. mSphere · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Genome Sequencing ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article

71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Sascha BrunkeDepartment of Microbial Pathogenicity Mechanisms, Leibniz Institute for Natural Product Research and Infection Biology - Hans Knoell Institute Jena (HKI), Beutenbergstrasse 11a, 07745 Jena, Germany.
Bernhard Hube

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Candida albicans and C. glabrata are the two most common pathogenic yeasts of humans, yet they are phylogenetically, genetically and phenotypically very different. In this review, we compare and contrast the strategies of C. albicans and C. glabrata to attach to and invade into the host, obtain nutrients and evade the host immune response. Although their strategies share some basic concepts, they differ greatly in their outcome. While C. albicans follows an aggressive strategy to subvert the host response and to obtain nutrients for its survival, C. glabrata seems to have evolved a strategy which is based on stealth, evasion and persistence, without causing severe damage in murine models. However, both fungi are successful as commensals and as pathogens of humans. Understanding these strategies will help in finding novel ways to fight Candida, and fungal infections in general.

Indexed as

Candida albicansCandida glabrataCandidiasisCell AdhesionHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumansPhylogeny

Identifiers

PMID23253282
PMCPMC3654559

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.