Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37070928›Full record

ReviewMedical mycology2023

Defining the relationship between phylogeny, clinical manifestation, and phenotype for Trichophyton mentagrophytes/interdigitale complex; a literature review and taxonomic recommendations.

Michaela Švarcová, Tomáš Větrovský, Miroslav Kolařík, Vit Hubka

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical mycology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Optimizing MALDI-TOF MS for routine dermatophyte identification, including Trichophyton indotineae.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Comparison of Fungal Culture, DermaGeniusJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Emerging antifungal resistance inEmerging microbes & infections · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Name changes for fungi of medical importance, 2022-2024.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Michaela ŠvarcováDepartment of Genetics and Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, , Prague, Czech Republic.
Tomáš VětrovskýLaboratory of Environmental Microbiology, Institute of Microbiology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic.
Miroslav KolaříkLaboratory of Fungal Genetics and Metabolism, Institute of Microbiology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic.
Vit HubkaLaboratory of Fungal Genetics and Metabolism, Institute of Microbiology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic.

Funding

Charles University Grant Agency GAUK 280721Czech Academy of Sciences 61388971Czech Ministry of Health NU21-05-00681
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study looked for correlations between molecular identification, clinical manifestation, and morphology for Trichophyton interdigitale and Trichophyton mentagrophytes. For this purpose, a total of 110 isolates were obtained from Czech patients with various clinical manifestations of dermatophytosis. Phenotypic characters were analyzed, and the strains were characterized using multilocus sequence typing. Among the 12 measured/scored phenotypic features, statistically significant differences were found only in growth rates at 37 °C and in the production of spiral hyphae, but none of these features is diagnostic. Correlations were found between T. interdigitale and higher age of patients and between clinical manifestations such as tinea pedis or onychomychosis. The MLST approach showed that internal transcribed spacer (ITS) genotyping of T. mentagrophytes isolates has limited practical benefits because of extensive gene flow between sublineages. Based on our results and previous studies, there are few taxonomic arguments for preserving both species names. The species show a lack of monophyly and unique morphology. On the other hand, some genotypes are associated with predominant clinical manifestations and sources of infections, which keep those names alive. This practice is questionable because the use of both names confuses identification, leading to difficulty in comparing epidemiological studies. The current identification method using ITS genotyping is ambiguous for some isolates and is not user-friendly. Additionally, identification tools such as matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry fail to distinguish these species. To avoid further confusion and to simplify identification in practice, we recommend using the name T. mentagrophytes for the entire complex. When clear differentiation of populations corresponding to T. interdigitale and Trichophyton indotineae is possible based on molecular data, we recommend optionally using a variety rank: T. mentagrophytes var. interdigitale and T. mentagrophytes var. indotineae.

Indexed as

TineaAnimalsArthrodermataceaeDNA, FungalDNA, Ribosomal SpacerMultilocus Sequence TypingPhenotypePhylogenySequence Analysis, DNATrichophytonDNA, FungalDNA, Ribosomal Spaceranthropophilic dermatophytesdermatophytosismultigene phylogenyskin infectionszoophilic dermatophytes

Identifiers

PMID37070928
PMCPMC10148955

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.