Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24746358›Full record

Trial reportOphthalmology2014

Association between in vitro susceptibility to natamycin and voriconazole and clinical outcomes in fungal keratitis.

Catherine Q Sun, Prajna Lalitha, N Venkatesh Prajna, Rajarathinam Karpagam, Manoharan Geetha, Kieran S O'Brien, Catherine E Oldenburg, Kathryn J Ray, Stephen D McLeod, Nisha R Acharya and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Antifungal susceptibility, clinical findings, and biofilm resistance of Fusarium species causing keratitis: a challenge for disease control.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The mammalian Ire1 inhibitor, 4µ8C, exhibits broad anti-Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Observational
  19. Diagnosing Fungal Keratitis and Simultaneously IdentifyingJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Catherine Q SunF.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Prajna LalithaAravind Eye Care System, Madurai, India.
N Venkatesh PrajnaAravind Eye Care System, Madurai, India.
Rajarathinam KarpagamAravind Eye Care System, Madurai, India.
Manoharan GeethaAravind Eye Care System, Madurai, India.
Kieran S O'BrienF.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Catherine E OldenburgF.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Kathryn J RayF.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Stephen D McLeodF.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Nisha R AcharyaF.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Thomas M LietmanF.I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: tom.lietman@ucsf.edu.
Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trial Group
Aravind Eye Hospital · INSan Francisco Foundation · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Myocotic Ulcer Treatment TrialU10EY018573 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LIETMAN, THOMAS M · 2009 to 2014
$3.7M
Predicting and Improving Clinical Outcomes for Bacterial KeratitisK23EY017897 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI ACHARYA, NISHA · 2007 to 2011
$1.1M
NEI NIH HHS K23 EY017897NEI NIH HHS K23EY017897NEI NIH HHS U10 EY018573NEI NIH HHS U10EY018573
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the association between minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and clinical outcomes in a fungal keratitis clinical trial.

designExperimental study using data from a randomized comparative trial.

participantsOf the 323 patients enrolled in the trial, we were able to obtain MIC values from 221 patients with monocular fungal keratitis.

methodsThe Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trial I was a randomized, double-masked clinical trial comparing clinical outcomes of monotherapy with topical natamycin versus voriconazole for the treatment of fungal keratitis. Speciation and determination of MIC to natamycin and voriconazole were performed according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. The relationship between MIC and clinical outcome was assessed.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was 3-month best spectacle-corrected visual acuity. Secondary outcomes included 3-month infiltrate or scar size; corneal perforation and/or therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty; and time to re-epithelialization.

resultsA 2-fold increase in MIC was associated with a larger 3-month infiltrate or scar size (0.21 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.31; P < 0.001) and increased odds of perforation (odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69; P = 0.02). No correlation was found between MIC and 3-month visual acuity. For natamycin-treated cases, an association was found between higher natamycin MIC with larger 3-month infiltrate or scar size (0.29 mm; 95% CI, 0.15-0.43; P < 0.001) and increased perforations (odds ratio, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.46-3.97; P < 0.001). Among voriconazole-treated cases, the voriconazole MIC did not correlate with any of the measured outcomes in the study.

conclusionsDecreased susceptibility to natamycin was associated with increased infiltrate or scar size and increased odds of perforation. There was no association between susceptibility to voriconazole and outcome.

Indexed as

Administration, TopicalAntifungal AgentsCicatrixCorneal PerforationCorneal UlcerDouble-Blind MethodEpithelium, CornealEye Infections, FungalFungiHumansKeratoplasty, PenetratingMicrobial Sensitivity TestsNatamycinOphthalmic SolutionsRe-EpithelializationTreatment OutcomeAntifungal AgentsNatamycinOphthalmic SolutionsVoriconazole

Identifiers

PMID24746358
PMCPMC4122634
OpenAlexW1977348918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.