Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32757139›Full record

ReviewBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2020

Factors influencing susceptibility testing of antifungal drugs: a critical review of document M27-A4 from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI).

Edinaira Sulany Oliveira de Sousa, Ana Claúdia Alves Cortez, Marcia de Souza Carvalho Melhem, Hagen Frickmann, João Vicente Braga de Souza

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Microorganisms · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Antifungal activity of almond (Current medical mycology · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Searching for new antifungals for the treatment of cryptococcosis.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. 2,4-Diacetylphloroglucinol ModulatesJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Edinaira Sulany Oliveira de SousaGraduate Program in Pharmaceutical Sciences, Federal University of Amazonas - UFAM, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil.
Ana Claúdia Alves CortezDepartment of Medical Microbiology, National Institute for Amazonian Research - INPA, André Araújo Avenue, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil.
Marcia de Souza Carvalho MelhemDepartment of Mycology, Adolfo Lutz Institute, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Hagen FrickmannDepartment of Tropical Medicine at the Bernhard Nocht Institute, German Armed Forces Hospital of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, Institute for Medical Microbiology, Virology and Hygiene, University Medicine Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
João Vicente Braga de SouzaDepartment of Medical Microbiology, National Institute for Amazonian Research - INPA, André Araújo Avenue, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil. joao.souza@inpa.gov.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3163-7499
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia · BRBernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine · DEUniversidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul · BRUniversidade Federal do Amazonas · BR

Funding

CSRD VA 1Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Amazonas PPSUS 2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to the increasing numbers of fungal infections and the emergence of drug-resistant fungi, optimization and standardization of diagnostic methods for the measurement of antifungal susceptibility are ongoing. The M27-A4 document by the US Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) is presently used for the interpretation of minimum inhibitory concentrations of major opportunistic yeast species as measured by broth microdilution testing in many countries. Although microdilution is considered a benchmark for reproducible and accurate results, increased testing capacity, and limited human bias, the method is often inaccessible to routine clinical laboratories and researchers, especially in low-income countries. Furthermore, several studies suggest that there are still a considerable number of factors that make the estimation of in vitro activity of antifungal agents challenging. This review article summarizes the limitations of the M27-A4 standard which, despite the advances and improvements obtained by the standardization of antimicrobial resistance testing methods by CLSI, still persist.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsFungiHumansLaboratoriesMicrobial Sensitivity TestsReference StandardsAntifungal AgentsAntifungal drugCLSIMicrodilutionSusceptibilityYeast

Identifiers

PMID32757139
PMCPMC7688838
OpenAlexW3046964408

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.