Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32033168›Full record

ReviewJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Monoclonal Antibodies as Tools to Combat Fungal Infections.

Sebastian Ulrich, Frank Ebel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. In Vitro Anti-Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Sources of Antifungal Drugs.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Sebastian UlrichInstitute for Infectious Diseases and Zoonoses, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, D-80539 Munich, Germany.
Frank EbelInstitute for Infectious Diseases and Zoonoses, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, D-80539 Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibodies represent an important element in the adaptive immune response and a major tool to eliminate microbial pathogens. For many bacterial and viral infections, efficient vaccines exist, but not for fungal pathogens. For a long time, antibodies have been assumed to be of minor importance for a successful clearance of fungal infections; however this perception has been challenged by a large number of studies over the last three decades. In this review, we focus on the potential therapeutic and prophylactic use of monoclonal antibodies. Since systemic mycoses normally occur in severely immunocompromised patients, a passive immunization using monoclonal antibodies is a promising approach to directly attack the fungal pathogen and/or to activate and strengthen the residual antifungal immune response in these patients.

Indexed as

invasive fungal infectionsmonoclonal antibodiesopsonizationprophylaxistherapy

Identifiers

PMID32033168
PMCPMC7151206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.