Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31159914›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2019

Invasive Fungal Infection.

Marie von Lilienfeld-Toal, Johannes Wagener, Hermann Einsele, Oliver A Cornely, Oliver Kurzai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2019. 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
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

91 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 171 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Fungal Infections in Pediatric Patients With Hematologic Malignancies and Stem Cell Transplantation: Impact on the Upper and Lower Respiratory Systems.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Antifungal Activity of 5-Fluorouridine AgainstMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  20. Review

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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marie von Lilienfeld-ToalNational Reference Center for Invasive Fungal Infections, Leibniz Institute for Natural Product Research and Infection Biology - Hans Knöll Institute (HKI), Jena; Clinic of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Jena; Institute for Hygiene and Microbiology, University of Würzburg, Chair of Medical Microbiology and Mycology, Würzburg; Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital of Würzburg; InfectControl 2020, Jena/Würzburg; Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), Department I of Internal Medicine, at the University Hospital of Cologne, European Excellence Center for Medical Mycology (ECMM), DGerman Center for Infection Research(DZIF) Partner Site Bonn Köln, Cologne University.
Johannes Wagener
Hermann Einsele
Oliver A Cornely
Oliver Kurzai
University of Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incidence of invasive fungal infection is approximately 6 cases per 100 000 persons per year. It is estimated that only half of such infections are detected during the patient's lifetime, making this one of the more common overlooked causes of death in intensive-care patients. The low detection rate is due in part to the complexity of the diagnostic work-up, in which the clinical, radiological, and microbiological findings must be considered. Fungi with resistance to antimycotic drugs have been found to be on the rise around the world.

methodsThis review is based on pertinent publications retrieved from a selective search in PubMed, with special attention to guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of invasive fungal infections caused by Candida spp., Aspergillus spp., Mucorales, and Fusarium spp.

resultsThe clinical risk factors for invasive fungal infection include, among others, congenital immune deficiency, protracted (>10 days) marked granulocytopenia (<0.5 x 109/L), allogeneic stem-cell transplantation, and treatment with immunosuppressive drugs or corticosteroids. High-risk groups include patients in intensive care and those with structural pulmonary disease and/or compli- cated influenza. The first line of treatment, supported by the findings of randomized clinical trials, consists of echinocandins for in- fections with Candida spp. (candidemia response rates: 75.6% for anidulafungin vs. 60.2% for fluconazole) and azole antimycotic drugs for infections with Aspergillus spp. (response rates: 52.8% for voriconazole vs. 31.6% for conventional amphotericin B). The recommended first-line treatment also depends on the local epidemiology. This challenge should be met by interdisciplinary collaboration. Therapeutic decision-making should also take account of the often severe undesired effects of antimycotic drugs (including impairment of hepatic and/or renal function) and the numerous interactions that some of them have with other drugs.

conclusionInvasive fungal infections are often overlooked in routine hospital care. They should be incorporated into antimicro- bial stewardship programs as an essential component. There is also a pressing need for the development of new classes of antimycotic drug.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsInvasive Fungal InfectionsAspergillusCandidaHumansIncidenceAntifungal Agents

Identifiers

PMID31159914
PMCPMC6549129
OpenAlexW2940423093

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.