Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29380188›Full record

ArticleMycopathologia2018

Comparative Study of the Effects of Fluconazole and Voriconazole on Candida glabrata, Candida parapsilosis and Candida rugosa Biofilms.

Priya Madhavan, Farida Jamal, Chong Pei Pei, Fauziah Othman, Arunkumar Karunanidhi, Kee Peng Ng

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Mycopathologia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. An update on clinically relevant, rare, and emergingClinical microbiology reviews · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Priya MadhavanSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Taylor's University, Lakeside Campus, No. 1, Jalan Taylor's, 47500, Subang Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia. Priya.Madhavan@taylors.edu.my.
Farida JamalDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
Chong Pei PeiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
Fauziah OthmanDepartment of Human Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
Arunkumar KarunanidhiDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
Kee Peng NgDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603, Lembah Pantai, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Universiti Putra Malaysia · MYTaylor's University · MYUniversity of Malaya · MY

Funding

Research University Grant Scheme 9333100
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infections by non-albicans Candida species are a life-threatening condition, and formation of biofilms can lead to treatment failure in a clinical setting. This study was aimed to demonstrate the in vitro antibiofilm activity of fluconazole (FLU) and voriconazole (VOR) against C. glabrata, C. parapsilosis and C. rugosa with diverse antifungal susceptibilities to FLU and VOR. The antibiofilm activities of FLU and VOR in the form of suspension as well as pre-coatings were assessed by XTT [2,3-bis-(2-methoxy-4-nitro-5-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium-5-carboxanilide] reduction assay. Morphological and intracellular changes exerted by the antifungal drugs on Candida cells were examined by scanning electron microscope (SEM) and transmission electron microscope (TEM). The results of the antibiofilm activities showed that FLU drug suspension was capable of killing C. parapsilosis and C. rugosa at minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of 4× MIC FLU and 256× MIC FLU, respectively. While VOR MICs ranging from 2× to 32× were capable of killing the biofilms of all Candida spp tested. The antibiofilm activities of pre-coated FLU were able to kill the biofilms at ¼× MIC FLU and ½× MIC FLU for C. parapsilosis and C. rugosa strains, respectively. While pre-coated VOR was able to kill the biofilms, all three Candida sp at ½× MIC VOR. SEM and TEM examinations showed that FLU and VOR treatments exerted significant impact on Candida cell with various degrees of morphological changes. In conclusion, a fourfold reduction in MIC

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsBiofilmsCandidaCandidiasisFluconazoleHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMicrobial ViabilityMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionVoriconazoleAntifungal AgentsFluconazoleVoriconazoleBiofilmsElectron microscopyFluconazoleNon-albicans CandidaVoriconazoleXTT assay

Identifiers

PMID29380188
OpenAlexW2794309376

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.