Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26677456›Full record

ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2015

Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Echinocandin Nonsusceptible Candida glabrata Bloodstream Infections: Data From a Large Multisite Population-Based Candidemia Surveillance Program, 2008-2014.

Snigdha Vallabhaneni, Angela A Cleveland, Monica M Farley, Lee H Harrison, William Schaffner, Zintar G Beldavs, Gordana Derado, Cau D Pham, Shawn R Lockhart, Rachel M Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

91 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Expression of 1,3-β-glucan synthase subunits inAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025
    Article
  10. Heterogeneity ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2025
    Article
  11. Role of liposomal amphotericin B in intensive care unit: an expert opinion paper.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2025
    Review
  12. Rapid Identification of Clinically RelevantJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The Effect ofClinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors.

Snigdha VallabhaneniEpidemic Intelligence Service , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ; Mycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne , Waterborne and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia.
Angela A ClevelandMycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne , Waterborne and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia.
Monica M FarleyDepartment of Medicine , Emory University School of Medicine , Atlanta, Georgia ; Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center , Georgia.
Lee H HarrisonDepartment of International Health , Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , Baltimore, Maryland.
William SchaffnerVanderbilt University School of Medicine , Nashville, Tennessee.
Zintar G BeldavsAcute and Communicable Disease Prevention, Oregon Health Authority , Portland.
Gordana DeradoBiostatistics and Information Management Office , Division of Foodborne, Waterborne and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia.
Cau D PhamMycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne , Waterborne and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia.
Shawn R LockhartMycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne , Waterborne and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia.
Rachel M SmithMycotic Diseases Branch, Division of Foodborne , Waterborne and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta, Georgia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background.  Echinocandins are first-line treatment for Candida glabrata candidemia. Echinocandin resistance is concerning due to limited remaining treatment options. We used data from a multisite, population-based surveillance program to describe the epidemiology and risk factors for echinocandin nonsusceptible (NS) C glabrata candidemia. Methods.  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Emerging Infections Program conducts population-based laboratory surveillance for candidemia in 4 metropolitan areas (7.9 million persons; 80 hospitals). We identified C glabrata cases occurring during 2008-2014; medical records of cases were reviewed, and C glabrata isolates underwent broth microdilution antifungal susceptibility testing. We defined echinocandin-NS C glabrata (intermediate or resistant) based on 2012 Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute minimum inhibitory concentration breakpoints. Independent risk factors for NS C glabrata were determined by stepwise logistic regression. Results.  Of 1385 C glabrata cases, 83 (6.0%) had NS isolates (19 intermediate and 64 resistant); the proportion of NS isolates rose from 4.2% in 2008 to 7.8% in 2014 (P < .001). The proportion of NS isolates at each hospital ranged from 0% to 25.8%; 3 large, academic hospitals accounted for almost half of all NS isolates. In multivariate analysis, prior echinocandin exposure (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.3; 95% CI, 2.6-1.2), previous candidemia episode (aOR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-5.1), hospitalization in the last 90 days (aOR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.0-3.5, and fluconazole resistance [aOR, 3.6; 95% CI, 2.0-6.4]) were significantly associated with NS C glabrata. Fifty-nine percent of NS C glabrata cases had no known prior echinocandin exposure. Conclusion.  The proportion of NS C glabrata isolates rose significantly during 2008-2014, and NS C glabrata frequency differed across hospitals. In addition to acquired resistance resulting from prior drug exposure, occurrence of NS C glabrata without prior echinocandin exposure suggests possible transmission of resistant organisms.

Indexed as

Candida glabrataCandidemiaechinocandin resistanceepidemiologyrisk factorstransmission of drug resistance

Identifiers

PMID26677456
PMCPMC4677623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.