ArticleMycopathologia2024
Comparative Transcriptome Analysis of T. rubrum, T. mentagrophytes, and M. gypseum Dermatophyte Biofilms in Response to Photodynamic Therapy.
Article in Mycopathologia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative gene expression analysis in closely related dermatophytes reveals secondary metabolism as a candidate driver of virulence.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy for Superficial, Skin, and Mucosal Fungal Infections: An Update.Microorganisms · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dermatophyte biofilms frequently count for inadequate responses and resistance to standard antifungal treatments, resulting in refractory chronic onychomycosis infection. Although antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) has clinically proven to exert significant antifungal effects or even capable of eradicating dermatophyte biofilms, considerably less is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying aPDT and the potential dysregulation of signaling networks that could antagonize its action. The aim of this study is to elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlining aPDT combat against dermatophyte biofilm in recalcitrant onychomycosis and to decipher the potential detoxification processes elicited by aPDT, facilitating the development of more effective photodynamic interventions. We applied genome-wide comparative transcriptome analysis to investigate how aPDT disrupting onychomycosis biofilm formed by three distinct dermatophytes, including Trichophyton rubrum, Trichophyton mentagrophytes, and Microsporum gypseum, the most frequently occurring pathogenic species. In total, 352.13 Gb of clean data were obtained for the transcriptomes of dermatophyte biofilms with or without aPDT treatment, resulting in 2,422.42 million reads with GC content of 51.84%, covering 99.9%, 98.5% and 99.4% of annotated genes of T. rubrum, T. mentagrophytes, and M. gypseum, respectively. The genome-wide orthologous analysis identified 6624 transcribed single-copy orthologous genes in all three species, and 36.5%, 6.8% and 17.9% of which were differentially expressed following aPDT treatment. Integrative orthology analysis demonstrated the upregulation of oxidoreductase activities is a highly conserved detoxification signaling alteration in response to aPDT across all investigated dermatophyte biofilms. This study provided new insights into the molecular mechanisms underneath anti-dermatophyte biofilm effects of aPDT and successfully identified a conserved detoxification regulation upon the aPDT application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38890181What 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.