ArticlePloS one2019
Efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B and anidulafungin using an antifungal lock technique (ALT) for catheter-related Candida albicans and Candida glabrata infections in an experimental model.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drug Clues for the Treatment of Fungal Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection With Antifungal Lock Therapy.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Review
- Combination of Systemic and Lock-Therapies with Micafungin Eradicate Catheter-Based Biofilms and Infections Caused byJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Biofilm: The invisible culprit in catheter-induced candidemia.AIMS microbiology · 2023Review
- Antifungal lock therapy: an eternal promise or an effective alternative therapeutic approach?Letters in applied microbiology · 2022Review
- Inhibition ofBioengineered · 2022Article
- Review
- Current and promising pharmacotherapeutic options for candidiasis.Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy · 2021Article
- Caenorhabditis elegans as a Model System To Assess Candida glabrata,Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2020Article
- Azole-resistant Aspergillus and Echinocandin-resistant Candida - What are the treatment options?Current fungal infection reports · 2020Article
- Antimicrobial Lock Therapy in Clinical Practice: A Scoping Review Protocol.Methods and protocols · 2020Article
- Pathogenesis and Clinical Relevance ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aims of this study were as follows. First, we sought to compare the in vitro susceptibility of liposomal amphotericin B (LAmB) and anidulafungin on Candida albicans and Candida glabrata biofilms growing on silicone discs. Second, we sought to compare the activity of LAmB versus anidulafungin for the treatment of experimental catheter-related C. albicans and C. glabrata infections with the antifungal lock technique in a rabbit model.
methodsTwo C. albicans and two C. glabrata clinical strains were used. The minimum biofilm eradication concentration for 90% eradication (MBEC90) values were determined after 48h of treatment with LAmB and anidulafungin. Confocal microscopy was used to visualize the morphology and viability of yeasts growing in biofilms. Central venous catheters were inserted into New Zealand rabbits, which were inoculated of each strain of C. albicans and C. glabrata. Then, catheters were treated for 48h with saline or with antifungal lock technique using either LAmB (5mg/mL) or anidulafungin (3.33mg/mL).
resultsIn vitro: anidulafungin showed greater activity than LAmB against C. albicans and C. glabrata strains. For C. albicans: MBEC90 of anidulafungin versus LAmB: CA176, 0.03 vs. 128 mg/L; CA180, 0.5 vs. 64 mg/L. For C. glabrata: MBEC90 of anidulafungin versus LAmB: CG171, 0.5 vs. 64 mg/L; CG334, 2 vs. 32 mg/L. In vivo: for C. albicans species, LAmB and anidulafungin achieved significant reductions relative to growth control of log10 cfu recovered from the catheter tips (CA176: 3.6±0.3 log10 CFU, p≤0.0001; CA180: 3.8±0.1 log10 CFU, p≤0.01). For C. glabrata, anidulafungin lock therapy achieved significant reductions relative to the other treatments (CG171: 4.8 log10 CFU, p≤0.0001; CG334: 5.1 log10 CFU, p≤0.0001).
conclusionsFor the C. albicans strains, both LAmB and anidulafungin may be promising antifungal lock technique for long-term catheter-related infections; however, anidulafungin showed significantly higher activity than LAmB against the C. glabrata strains.
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.