Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38667949›Full record

ReviewJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Amphotericin B in the Era of New Antifungals: Where Will It Stand?

Karolina Akinosoglou, Emmanouil Angelos Rigopoulos, Despoina Papageorgiou, Georgios Schinas, Eleni Polyzou, Effrosyni Dimopoulou, Charalambos Gogos, George Dimopoulos

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. The KW18 peptide acts as a dual antimicrobial and immunomodulatory therapeutic candidate in the context of antimicrobial resistance.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Materials today. Bio · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karolina AkinosoglouSchool of Medicine, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-4289-9494
Emmanouil Angelos RigopoulosSchool of Medicine, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece.
Despoina PapageorgiouSchool of Medicine, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece.
Georgios SchinasSchool of Medicine, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece.ORCID 0000-0001-7963-1865
Eleni PolyzouSchool of Medicine, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece.
Effrosyni DimopoulouHellenic Institute for the Study of Sepsis, 11528 Athens, Greece.
Charalambos GogosSchool of Medicine, University of Patras, 26504 Patras, Greece.
George Dimopoulos3rd Department of Critical Care, Evgenidio Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11528 Athens, Greece.
University of Patras · GRNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Amphotericin B (AmB) has long stood as a cornerstone in the treatment of invasive fungal infections (IFIs), especially among immunocompromised patients. However, the landscape of antifungal therapy is evolving. New antifungal agents, boasting novel mechanisms of action and better safety profiles, are entering the scene, presenting alternatives to AmB's traditional dominance. This shift, prompted by an increase in the incidence of IFIs, the growing demographic of immunocompromised individuals, and changing patterns of fungal resistance, underscores the continuous need for effective treatments. Despite these challenges, AmB's broad efficacy and low resistance rates maintain its essential status in antifungal therapy. Innovations in AmB formulations, such as lipid complexes and liposomal delivery systems, have significantly mitigated its notorious nephrotoxicity and infusion-related reactions, thereby enhancing its clinical utility. Moreover, AmB's efficacy in treating severe and rare fungal infections and its pivotal role as prophylaxis in high-risk settings highlight its value and ongoing relevance. This review examines AmB's standing amidst the ever-changing antifungal landscape, focusing on its enduring significance in current clinical practice and exploring its potential future therapeutic adaptations.

Indexed as

amphotericin Bantifungal agentsdrug resistanceepidemiologyfungalfungal infectionsimmunocompromised hostliposomesmycosesprophylactic treatment

Identifiers

PMID38667949
PMCPMC11051097
OpenAlexW4394683481

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.