ArticleScientific reports2018
Identification and Characterization of Fusarium proliferatum, a New Species of Fungi that Cause Fungal Keratitis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification and Characterization of PathogenicJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- First Report ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- MoSInternational journal of nanomedicine · 2025Article
- Advancements in Green Nanoparticle Technology: Focusing on the Treatment of Clinical Phytopathogens.Biomolecules · 2024Review
- Shift in the rhizosphere soil fungal community associated with root rot infection of Plukenetia volubilis Linneo caused by Fusarium and Rhizopus species.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2024Article
- The Antifungal Activities of Silver Nano-Aggregates Biosynthesized from the Aqueous Extract and the Alkaline Aqueous Fraction ofNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Development of thermosensitive hydrogel of Amphotericin-B and Lactoferrin combination-loaded PLGA-PEG-PEI nanoparticles for potential eradication of ocular fungal infections:International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2023Article
- A Case of Laying Hens Mycosis Caused byVeterinary medicine international · 2023Article
- Antifungal Potential of Capsaicinoids and Capsinoids from theMicroorganisms · 2022Review
- Phylogenetic relationship ofIranian journal of microbiology · 2022Article
- Update on diagnosis and management of refractory corneal infections.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Review
- Defense and Offense Strategies: The Role of Aspartic Proteases in Plant-Pathogen Interactions.Biology · 2021Review
- Identification and molecular characterization of Subramaniula asteroides causing human fungal keratitis: a case report.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- A One Health Perspective to RecognizeJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- First Demonstration of ClinicalMicroorganisms · 2020Article
- Identification and engineering of 32 membered antifungal macrolactone notonesomycins.Microbial cell factories · 2020Article
- Structural basis of Fusarium myosin I inhibition by phenamacril.PLoS pathogens · 2020Article
- First report on molecular identification ofF1000Research · 2020Article
- First Comprehensive Report of ClinicalMicroorganisms · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fusarium proliferatum (F. proliferatum) is known as a pathogen of corn and other crops, but its role in fungal keratitis has not been well investigated. Among 877 Fusarium isolates, we identified 155 (17.7%) stains as F. proliferatum according to their morphological features and partial DNA sequencing of translation elongation factor-[Formula: see text] (EF-[Formula: see text]) in this study. In vitro antifungal susceptibility tests showed that the F. proliferatum strains were sensitive to natamycin and vorionazole but resistant to amphotericin B, fluconazol, ketoconazole and itaconazole. Most of the F. proliferatum-positive keratitis patients (44/155,28.4%) were aged 51-60 years old. The main cause of infection was injury by a plant (51/155, 32.9%). A combination of 1% amphotericin B and 3% ketoconazole cured 45.2% (14/31) and a combination of 0.5% natamycin and 0.5% voriconazole cured 59.1% (13/22) of F. proliferatum-positive patients. The date suggests that F. proliferatum identified through EF-1ɑ DNA sequencing is an important new species that causes fungal keratitis. Based on antifungal susceptibility, treatment with a combination of 0.5% natamycin and 0.5% voriconazole improves the therapeutic efficacy in F. prolifertum-positive patients.
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.