Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24800928›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2014

Comparison and optimization of two MALDI-TOF MS platforms for the identification of medically relevant yeast species.

M A Pence, E McElvania TeKippe, M A Wallace, C-A D Burnham

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Mass spectrometry in research laboratories and clinical diagnostic: a new era in medical mycology.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Recent applications of mass spectrometry in bacterial lipidomics.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Taxonomy and evolution ofComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2018
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: The Role of Emerging Diagnostic Technologies.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2017
    Review
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

4 authors.

M A PenceDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Division of Laboratory and Genomic Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave., Campus Box 8118, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
E McElvania TeKippe
M A Wallace
C-A D Burnham

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid identification of yeast is essential for the optimization of antifungal therapy. The objective of our study was to evaluate two matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) platforms, the bioMérieux VITEK MS (IVD Knowledgebase v.2.0) and Bruker Biotyper (software version 3.1), for the rapid identification of medically relevant yeast. One hundred and seventeen isolates, representing six genera and 18 species, were analyzed using multiple direct smear methods to optimize identification. Sequence analysis was the gold standard for comparison. Isolates were analyzed with VITEK MS using the direct smear method +/- a 25 % formic acid on-plate extraction. For Biotyper, isolates were analyzed using direct smear without formic acid, and with 25 % and 100 % formic acid on-plate extractions. When all methods were included, VITEK MS correctly identified 113 (96.6 %) isolates after 24 h with one misidentification, and Biotyper correctly identified 77 (65.8 %) isolates using a threshold of ≥2.0 with no misidentifications. Using a revised threshold of ≥1.7, Biotyper correctly identified 103 (88.0 %) isolates, with 3 (2.6 %) misidentifications. For both platforms, the number of identifications was significantly increased using a formic acid overlay (VITEK MS, p < 0.01; Biotyper, p < 0.001), and reducing the Biotyper threshold from ≥2.0 to ≥1.7 significantly increased the rate of identification (p < 0.001). The data in this study demonstrate that the direct smear method with on-plate formic acid extraction can be used for yeast identification on both MS platforms, and more isolates are identified using the VITEK MS system (p < 0.01).

Indexed as

Diagnostic ErrorsHumansMicrobiological TechniquesMycologyMycosesSensitivity and SpecificitySpectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-IonizationYeasts

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.