Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33413168›Full record

ReviewBMC infectious diseases2021

Cryptococcal fungemia and Mycobacterium haemophilum cellulitis in a patient receiving ruxolitinib: a case report and literature review.

Naruemit Sayabovorn, Piriyaporn Chongtrakool, Methee Chayakulkeeree

Open access · goldAbstract readCase ReportsReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cavitary lung lesions caused byBMJ case reports · 2024
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Cryptococcus neoformans, a global threat to human health.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2023
    Review
  6. Ruxolitinib Treatment During Myelofibrosis Leads to CutaneousClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Naruemit SayabovornDivision of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand.
Piriyaporn ChongtrakoolDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Methee ChayakulkeereeDivision of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand. methee.cha@mahidol.ac.th.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4582-4914
Siriraj Hospital · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRuxolitinib is a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor that is used for treatment of myeloproliferative diseases. It exhibits potent anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects, and may increase the risk of opportunistic infections. Here, we report a rare case of Cryptococcus neoformans and Mycobacterium haemophilum coinfection in a myelofibrosis patient who was receiving ruxolitinib. CASE PRESENTATION: A 70-year-old Thai man who was diagnosed with JAK2V617F-mutation-positive primary myelofibrosis had been treated with ruxolitinib for 4 years. He presented with cellulitis at his left leg for 1 week. Physical examination revealed fever, dyspnea, desaturation, and sign of inflammation on the left leg and ulcers on the right foot. Blood cultures showed positive for C. neoformans. He was prescribed intravenous amphotericin B deoxycholate with a subsequent switch to liposomal amphotericin B due to the development of acute kidney injury. He developed new onset of fever after 1 month of antifungal treatment, and the lesion on his left leg had worsened. Biopsy of that skin lesion was sent for mycobacterial culture, and the result showed M. haemophilum. He was treated with levofloxacin, ethambutol, and rifampicin; however, the patient eventually developed septic shock and expired.

conclusionsThis is the first case of C. neoformans and M. haemophilum coinfection in a patient receiving ruxolitinib treatment. Although uncommon, clinicians should be aware of the potential for multiple opportunistic infections that may be caused by atypical pathogens in patients receiving ruxolitinib.

Indexed as

AgedAmphotericin BAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntifungal AgentsAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalCellulitisCoinfectionCryptococcosisCryptococcus neoformansDeoxycholic AcidDrug CombinationsFungemiaHumansMaleMycobacterium haemophilumMycobacterium InfectionsAmphotericin Bamphotericin B, deoxycholate drug combinationAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntifungal AgentsAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalDeoxycholic AcidDrug Combinationsliposomal amphotericin BNitrilesPyrazolesPyrimidinesruxolitinibCryptococcosisCryptococcusMycobacterium haemophilumMyelofibrosisRuxolitinib

Identifiers

PMID33413168
PMCPMC7792301
OpenAlexW3120450320

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.