ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2023
T2Candida assay: diagnostic performance and impact on antifungal prescribing.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The future of fungal diagnostics: What's next in laboratory testing for invasive fungal infection?Medical mycology · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Approaches to Invasive Candidiasis: Challenges and New Perspectives.Mycopathologia · 2025Review
- The Molecular Diagnosis of Invasive Fungal Diseases with a Focus on PCR.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A novel quantitative double antigen sandwich ELISA for detecting total antibodies against Candida albicans enolase 1.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Article
- Stewardship-Guided T2Candida Testing Shortens Time to Antifungal Treatment and Reduces Antifungal Usage Among Medical Intensive Care Unit Patients With Septic Shock.Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To assess the performance of T2Candida for the diagnosis of invasive candidiasis (IC) against gold standards of candidaemia or consensus IC definitions, and to evaluate the impact of T2Candida on antifungal drug prescribing. Methods: A retrospective review was undertaken of all T2Candida (T2MR technology, T2 Biosystems) performed from October 2020 to February 2022. T2Candida performance was evaluated against confirmed candidaemia or against proven/probable IC within 48 hours of T2Candida, and its impact on antifungal drug prescriptions. Results: T2Candida was performed in 61 patients, with 6 (9.8%) positive results. Diagnostic performance of T2Candida against candidaemia had a specificity of 85.7% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.8%. When comparing T2Candida results with consensus definitions of IC, the specificity and NPV of T2Candida was respectively 90% (54/60) and 98.2% (54/55) for proven IC, and 91.4% (53/58) and 96.4% (53/55) for proven/probable IC. Antifungals were initiated in three of six patients (50%) with a positive T2Candida result. Thirty-three patients were receiving empirical antifungals at the time of T2Candida testing, and a negative result prompted cessation of antifungals in 11 (33%) patients, compared with 6 (25%) antifungal prescriptions stopped following negative beta-d-glucan (BDG) testing in a control population ( Conclusions: T2Candida shows high specificity and NPV compared with evidence of
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.