ArticleMycopathologia2015
Clinical and microbiological investigation of fungemia from four hospitals in China.
Article in Mycopathologia, 2015. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Epidemiology and Clinical Characteristics of Fungemia in a Tertiary Hospital in Southern China: A 6-Year Retrospective Study.Mycopathologia · 2023Article
- Distribution and antifungal susceptibility pattern ofVirulence · 2022Review
- Molecular Typing of Candida glabrata.Mycopathologia · 2020Review
- Multilocus Sequence Typing Reveals Clonality of Fluconazole-NonsusceptibleFrontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- The epidemiology of non-Candida yeast isolated from blood: The Asia Surveillance Study.Mycoses · 2019Article
- Analyses of the Global Multilocus Genotypes of the Human Pathogenic YeastFrontiers in microbiology · 2019Article
- Multilocus sequence analyses reveal extensive diversity and multiple origins of fluconazole resistance in Candida tropicalis from tropical China.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, fungemia cases from four tertiary hospitals located in Shanghai and Anhui province in China from March 2012 to December 2013 were enrolled to investigate clinical features, species distribution, antifungal susceptibility and strain relatedness. During the study period, 137 non-duplicate cases and their corresponding isolates were collected. Six different genera of fungi were identified, of which Candida spp. were the most common (126/137, 91.97 %), with C. albicans predominating (48/137, 35.03 %). The non-Candida fungi rate reached 8.03 % (11/137), and Pichia spp. was the most common (5/137, 3.65 %). Compared with C. albicans, non-C. albicans fungi-associated fungemia was more likely in younger (p = 0.004) and male patients (χ (2) = 6.2618, p = 0.0123) and patients from ICUs (χ (2) = 6.3783, p = 0.0116). Overall, the susceptible/WT rates of common Candida spp. to fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, flucytosine, amphotericin B and caspofungin were 74.63, 92.31, 93.16, 96.58, 100 and 95.69 %, respectively. C. tropicalis and C. guilliermondii had a low susceptibility to fluconazole: 79.95 and 77.78 %, respectively. No isolates were resistant/WT to caspofungin, but C. parapsilosis and C. guilliermondii had high MIC90 values; 1 and 2 mg/L, respectively. In terms of genotyping, MLST was taken for C. glabrata and C. tropicalis, while microsatellite marker analysis was used for C. albicans and C. parapsilosis. C. glabrata was predominantly clone ST7, accounting for 75 %, while the other isolates showed genetic diversity. Considering the increased proportion of non-C. albicans fungi and the presence of endemic clones of C. glabrata, it is essential to undertake additional surveillance of fungemia.
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.