ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2021
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
51 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Clinical Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Antifungal, Fosmanogepix, in Patients with Candidemia Caused by Candida aurisAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2023Trial
- First Case of Bloodstream Infection byAnnals of laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- Validation of molecular detection ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Virulence determinants, antifungal resistance, and genotype-phenotype associations in Candida bloodstream isolates: a three-year surveillance study from Northern India.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Sensititre YeastOne for antifungal susceptibility testing ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Deciphering the multidrug resistance paradigm inAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026Review
- A Carboxyl-Functionalized Graphene Quantum Dot Coating for Catheters Effective Against Emerging Drug-ResistantJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- Prevalence, pattern of disease and antimicrobial susceptibility ofSouthern African journal of infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Molecular epidemiological characteristics, antifungal resistance and pathogenicity of Candidozyma auris in Guangzhou, South China.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Bad to the bone:ASM case reports · 2025Article
- Active and Passive Immunization of Pan-Fungal Vaccine NXT-2 Reduces Morbidity and Mortality in an Immunosuppressed Murine Model ofVaccines · 2025Article
- Biological Features, Antimicrobial Susceptibility and Phenotypic Characterization ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the MIC test strips for antifungal susceptibility testing ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- A benchmark dataset for validatingMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Comparison of broth microdilution and Etest® methods for susceptibility testing of amphotericin B in Candida auris.Medical mycology · 2025Article
- Review
- Genomics insights of candidiasis: mechanisms of pathogenicity and drug resistance.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Candida auris is a multidrug-resistant fungal pathogen that is endemic in South African hospitals. We tested bloodstream C. auris isolates that were submitted to a reference laboratory for national laboratory-based surveillance for candidemia in 2016 and 2017. We confirmed the species identification by phenotypic/molecular methods. We tested susceptibility to amphotericin B, anidulafungin, caspofungin, micafungin, itraconazole, posaconazole, voriconazole, fluconazole, and flucytosine using broth microdilution and Etest methods. We interpreted MICs using tentative breakpoints. We sequenced the genomes of a subset of isolates and compared them to the C. auris B8441 reference strain. Of 400 C. auris isolates, 361 (90%) were resistant to at least one antifungal agent, 339 (94%) to fluconazole alone (MICs of ≥32 µg/ml), 19 (6%) to fluconazole and amphotericin B (MICs of ≥2 µg/ml), and 1 (0.3%) to amphotericin B alone. Two (0.5%) isolates from a single patient were pan-resistant (resistant to fluconazole, amphotericin B, and echinocandins). Of 92 isolates selected for whole-genome sequencing, 77 clustered in clade III, including the pan-resistant isolates, 13 in clade I, and 2 in clade IV. Eighty-four of the isolates (91%) were resistant to at least one antifungal agent; both resistant and susceptible isolates had mutations. The common substitutions identified across the different clades were VF125AL, Y132F, K177R, N335S, and E343D in
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.