ArticleMycopathologia2014
Multi-probe real-time PCR identification of four common Candida species in blood culture broth.
Article in Mycopathologia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests forPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Updates in Laboratory Identification of Invasive Fungal Infection in Neonates.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Rapid preparation of Candida genomic DNA: combined use of enzymatic digestion and thermal disruption.AMB Express · 2023Article
- Multiplex size marker (YEAST PLEX) for rapid and accurate identification of pathogenic yeasts.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2022Article
- Recent Progress in the Diagnosis of Pathogenic Candida Species in Blood Culture.Mycopathologia · 2016Review
- A Real-Time PCR Assay Based on 5.8S rRNA Gene (5.8S rDNA) for Rapid Detection of Candida from Whole Blood Samples.Mycopathologia · 2016Article
- Multicenter evaluation of Candida QuickFISH BC for identification of Candida species directly from blood culture bottles.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We developed a single-tube real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay with multiple hybridization probes for detecting Candida albicans, C. tropicalis, C. glabrata, and C. parapsilosis. Primers were designed to amplify 18S rRNA gene of the genus Candida, and DNA probes were designed to hybridize two areas of the amplicons. The amplification curves and specific melting peaks of the probes hybridized with PCR product were used for definite species identifications. The reaction specificity was 100 % when evaluating the assay using DNA samples from 21 isolates of fungal and bacterial species. The assay was further evaluated in 129 fungal blood culture broth samples which were culture positive for fungus. Of the 129 samples, 119 were positively identified as: C. albicans (39), C. tropicalis (30), C. parapsilosis (23), C. glabrata (20), Candida spp. (5), and two samples containing mixed C. glabrata/C. albicans and C. glabrata/C. tropicalis. The five Candida spp. were identified by sequencing analysis as C. krusei, C. dubliniensis, C. aquaetextoris, and two isolates of C. athensensis. Of the ten samples which showed negative PCR results, six were Cryptococcus neoformans, and the others were Trichosporon sp., Rhodotorula sp., Fusarium sp., and Penicillium marneffei. Our findings show that the assay was highly effective in identifying the four medically important Candida species. The results can be available within 3 h after positivity of a blood culture broth sample.
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.