ReviewMycopathologia2016
Lichtheimia Infection in a Lymphoma Patient: Case Report and a Brief Review of the Available Diagnostic Tools.
Review in Mycopathologia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oral Isavuconazole Combined with Nebulized Inhalation and Bronchoscopic Administration of Amphotericin B for the Treatment of Pulmonary Mucormycosis: A Case Report and Literature Review.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Disseminated Invasive Mucormycosis Infection Following Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.Clinical hematology international · 2023Article
- Risk Assessment for Molds in the Vicinity of a Child Requiring Peritoneal Dialysis Living in a Rural Northern German Area.Microorganisms · 2021Article
- First Case of Rhinocerebral Mucormycosis Caused by Lichtheimia ornata, with a Review of Lichtheimia Infections.Mycopathologia · 2020Review
- The Curious Case of "Case Report" of Infections Caused by Human and Animal Fungal Pathogens: An Educational Tool, an Online Archive, or a Format in Need of Retooling.Mycopathologia · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We describe the case of a patient with a T-lymphoblastic lymphoma whose disseminated mucormycosis was diagnosed with delay, and we address the diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making process and review the diagnostic workup of patients with potential IFD. The diagnosis was delayed despite a suggestive radiological presentation of the patient's pulmonary lesion. The uncommon risk profile (T-lymphoblastic lymphoma, short neutropenic phases) wrongly led to a low level of suspicion. The diagnosis was also hampered by the lack of indirect markers for infections caused by Mucorales, the low sensitivity of both fungal culture and panfungal PCR, and the limited availability of species-specific PCR. A high level of suspicion of IFD is needed, and aggressive diagnostic procedures should be promptly initiated even in apparently low-risk patients with uncommon presentations. The extent of the analytical workup should be decided on a case-by-case base. Diagnostic tests such as the galactomannan and β-D-glucan test and/or PCR on biological material followed by sequencing should be chosen according to their availability and after evaluation of their specificity and sensitivity. In high-risk patients, preemptive therapy with a broad-spectrum mould-active antifungal agent should be started before definitive diagnostic findings become available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27115610What 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.