ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015
Comparing Etest and Broth Microdilution for Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of the Most-Relevant Pathogenic Molds.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global prevalence and trends of fluconazole resistance in non-albicans Candida species: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Performance of the Sensititre YeastOne assay compared with EUCAST E.Def 9.4 againstJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- Comparison of gradient concentration strip and EUCAST methods for itraconazole and posaconazole MICs inAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026Article
- Investigation of azole resistance inJournal of medical microbiology · 2026Article
- Azole Resistance inJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- kexB Gene Correlates With Aspergillus flavus Keratitis Severity: A Whole-Genome Analysis.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Commercial Methods for Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Saprophytic Molds: Can They Be Used to Detect Resistance?Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Epidemiology, Modern Diagnostics, and the Management of Mucorales Infections.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
- Multicenter Italian Study on "In Vitro Activities" of Isavuconazole, Voriconazole, Amphotericin B, and Caspofungin forInfection and drug resistance · 2022Article
- Antifungal Susceptibility Testing: A Primer for Clinicians.Open forum infectious diseases · 2021Review
- Review
- Can We Improve Antifungal Susceptibility Testing?Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Review
- Role and Interpretation of Antifungal Susceptibility Testing for the Management of Invasive Fungal Infections.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Species Distribution and Comparison between EUCAST and Gradient Concentration Strips Methods for Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of 112Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2020Article
- Antifungal Susceptibility Testing: Current Approaches.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2020Review
- Comparative evaluation of E-test and CLSI methods for Itraconazole, Fluconazole and Ketoconazole susceptibilities of Microsporum canis strains.Mycopathologia · 2020Article
- Article
- Identification by Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization-Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry and Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Non-Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasive mold infections are life-threatening diseases for which appropriate antifungal therapy is crucial. Their epidemiology is evolving, with the emergence of triazole-resistant Aspergillus spp. and multidrug-resistant non-Aspergillus molds. Despite the lack of interpretive criteria, antifungal susceptibility testing of molds may be useful in guiding antifungal therapy. The standard broth microdilution method (BMD) is demanding and requires expertise. We assessed the performance of a commercialized gradient diffusion method (Etest method) as an alternative to BMD. The MICs or minimal effective concentrations (MECs) of amphotericin B, voriconazole, posaconazole, caspofungin, and micafungin were assessed for 290 clinical isolates of the most representative pathogenic molds (154 Aspergillus and 136 non-Aspergillus isolates) with the BMD and Etest methods. Essential agreements (EAs) within ±2 dilutions of ≥90% between the two methods were considered acceptable. EAs for amphotericin B and voriconazole were >90% for most potentially susceptible species. For posaconazole, the correlation was acceptable for Mucoromycotina but Etest MIC values were consistently lower for Aspergillus spp. (EAs of <90%). Excellent EAs were found for echinocandins with highly susceptible (MECs of <0.015 μg/ml) or intrinsically resistant (MECs of >16 μg/ml) strains. However, MEC determinations lacked consistency between methods for strains exhibiting mid-range MECs for echinocandins. We concluded that the Etest method is an appropriate alternative to BMD for antifungal susceptibility testing of molds under specific circumstances, including testing with amphotericin B or triazoles for non-Aspergillus molds (Mucoromycotina and Fusarium spp.). Additional study of molecularly characterized triazole-resistant Aspergillus isolates is required to confirm the ability of the Etest method to detect voriconazole and posaconazole resistance among Aspergillus spp.
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.