Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33611738›Full record

ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2021

Genetic diversity assessed using PFGE, MLP and MLST in Candida spp. candidemia isolates obtained from a Brazilian hospital.

Heliara Maria Spina Canela, Bárbara Cardoso, Miliane Rodrigues Frazão, Juliana Pfrimer Falcão, Lucia Helena Vitali, Roberto Martinez, Márcia Eliana da Silva Ferreira

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  3. Antifungal susceptibility, molecular epidemiology, and clinical risk factors ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Heliara Maria Spina CanelaDepartamento de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Faculdade de Ciências Farmacêuticas de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Bloco S - Térreo - Sala 013A-S, Avenida do Café S/N, CEP 14040-903, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4476-3777
Bárbara CardosoDepartamento de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Faculdade de Ciências Farmacêuticas de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Bloco S - Térreo - Sala 013A-S, Avenida do Café S/N, CEP 14040-903, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6989-3757
Miliane Rodrigues FrazãoDepartamento de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Faculdade de Ciências Farmacêuticas de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Bloco S - Térreo - Sala 013A-S, Avenida do Café S/N, CEP 14040-903, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
Juliana Pfrimer FalcãoDepartamento de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Faculdade de Ciências Farmacêuticas de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Bloco S - Térreo - Sala 013A-S, Avenida do Café S/N, CEP 14040-903, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
Lucia Helena VitaliFaculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
Roberto MartinezFaculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
Márcia Eliana da Silva FerreiraDepartamento de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Faculdade de Ciências Farmacêuticas de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Bloco S - Térreo - Sala 013A-S, Avenida do Café S/N, CEP 14040-903, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. mesfe@fcfrp.usp.br.
Universidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade de Ribeirão Preto · BR

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2013/23485-0Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2014/10628-0
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Candida spp. are the main causative agents of invasive fungal infections in immunocompromised patients. Candidemia has attributable mortality rates of 15 to 35% and increases hospitalisation time and costs, thus making this disease a public health concern. This study aimed to use pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), microsatellite length polymorphism (MLP) and multilocus sequence typing (MLST) to analyse the genetic relationships among 65 Candida spp. bloodstream isolates, including 35 Candida albicans, 15 Candida glabrata and 15 Candida tropicalis isolates, all of which were obtained from patients in a Brazilian hospital. Moreover, patient clinical data were assessed. All techniques resulted in high discriminatory indexes. C. albicans and C. tropicalis isolates showed high genetic variability, while C. glabrata isolates had relatively low genetic variability. Moreover, a cluster of C. glabrata isolates was identified in a hospital unit. New MLST sequence types, diploid sequence types and alleles are described. Relationships were not observed between the molecular typing results and clinical characteristics. The molecular typing of clinical strains increases our understanding of candidemia epidemiology and promotes the development of strategies that can reduce the incidence of this disease. Moreover, this study is the first to combine these techniques to genotype these three species in Brazil.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBrazilCandidaCandidemiaChildChild, PreschoolElectrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-FieldFemaleHospitalsHumansInfantInfant, NewbornCandida spp.CandidemiaMicrosatellite length polymorphismMultilocus sequence typingPulsed-field gel electrophoresis

Identifiers

PMID33611738
PMCPMC8105495
OpenAlexW3133214757

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.