ArticleMycopathologia2014
In vitro susceptibility of Candida isolates from organ transplant recipients to newer antifungals.
Article in Mycopathologia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Influence of Eugenia uniflora Extract on Adhesion to Human Buccal Epithelial Cells, Biofilm Formation, and Cell Surface Hydrophobicity of Candida spp. from the Oral Cavity of Kidney Transplant Recipients.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Organ transplant recipients (OTR) are at higher risk of developing life-threatening infections. In this study, we tested 527 Candida isolates obtained from the oral and genital mucosa from OTR and healthy controls in order to monitor antifungal susceptibility patterns in this particular risk group. Testing was carried out in parallel for already marketed azoles and anidulafungin. Minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined using the E-test(®) for azoles and CLSI broth microdilution for anidulafungin. Overall, there was no difference in the distribution of Candida spp. for both groups, C. albicans being the most frequently isolated Candida sp. followed by C. glabrata. Also, there were only minor differences in the susceptibility patterns to all antifungal agents. All C. albicans isolates were fully susceptible to fluconazole and voriconazole. In C. glabrata, 2.2% (n = 1) were resistant to fluconazole, and 82.6% (n = 38) to itraconazole, and in C. krusei, 66.7% (n = 2) were resistant in itraconazole. All strains were susceptible to voriconazole. Only fluconazole showed a higher rate of resistant C. glabrata isolates for OTR (3.7%), whereas the control group showed only intermediate susceptible and no resistant isolates. As there are no breakpoints established for posaconazole by CLSI, breakpoints determined by EUCAST were used. A total of 87.9% of C. albicans, 81.3% of C. parapsilosis and 66.7% of C. tropicalis were considered susceptible. C. glabrata and C. krusei showed higher MIC values and thus lesser susceptibility than the other Candida species. There were no differences observed between OTR and control groups. For anidulafungin, 99.8% of C. albicans isolates were susceptible, 0.2% were intermediate, whereas for C. glabrata, only 95.3% were susceptible, 0.2% were resistant and 4.5% were interpreted as intermediate. Interestingly, the two resistant isolates were found in the control group. Also, the controls showed a marginally higher percentage of intermediate strains compared to the transplant patients. All in all, resistant isolates were only observed for C. glabrata of the control group.
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.