ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2014
The impact of antifungals on toll-like receptors.
Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2014. 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.
- Conventional amphotericin B elicits markers of immunogenic cell death on leukemic blasts, mediates immunostimulatory effects on phagocytic cells, and synergizes with PD-L1 blockade.Oncoimmunology · 2022Article
- The Role of Toll-Like Receptors in Skin Host Defense, Psoriasis, and Atopic Dermatitis.Journal of immunology research · 2019Review
- L-Asparaginase of Leishmania donovani: Metabolic target and its role in Amphotericin B resistance.International journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance · 2017Article
- Amphotericin B Increases Transglutaminase 2 Expression Associated with Upregulation of Endocytotic Activity in Mouse Microglial Cell Line BV-2.Neurochemical research · 2017Article
- Immunoregulation in Fungal Diseases.Microorganisms · 2016Review
- Isolation, molecular identification, and antifungal susceptibility profiles of vaginal isolates ofIranian journal of microbiology · 2016Article
- Low-dose antibiotics: current status and outlook for the future.Frontiers in microbiology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fungi are increasingly recognized as major pathogens in immunocompromised individuals. With the increase in the number of fungal infections each year and the development of resistance to current therapy, new approaches to treatment including stimulation of the immune response in addition to concurrent pharmacotherapy is ongoing. The most common invasive fungal infections are caused by Candida spp., Aspergillus spp., and Cryptococcus spp. Amphotericin B (AmB) has remained the cornerstone of therapy against many fulminant fungal infections but its use is limited by its multitude of side effects. Echinocandins are a newer class of antifungal drugs with activity against Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. and constitutes an alternative to AmB due to superior patient tolerability and fewer side effects. Due to their oral delivery, azoles continue to be heavily used for simple and complex diseases, such as fluconazole for candidal vaginitis and voriconazole for aspergillosis. The objective of this paper is to present current knowledge regarding the multiple interactions between the broad spectrum antifungals and the innate immune response, primarily focusing on the toll-like receptors.
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.