ArticleMycopathologia2024
Detection of Pan-Dermatophytes and Trichophyton rubrum Using Recombinase Polymerase Amplification-Lateral Flow Dipstick Assay.
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.
- Rapid Detection of Fungi in Nail Specimens Using Multi-Tube Recombinase Polymerase Amplification Assay.Mycoses · 2026Article
- Specific Primers and Nested PCR FindJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTraditional methods for diagnosing onychomycosis are characterized by limited sensitivity and prolonged processing times, and heavily rely on the skill level of laboratory personnel.
objectivesTo develop a fast, simple, user-friendly, and reliable molecular assay that offers high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of common dermatophytes in nail specimens.
methodsWe developed a technique that integrates recombinase polymerase isothermal amplification with lateral flow dipstick (RPA-LFD) for the detection of pan-dermatophytes and Trichophyton rubrum, and evaluated its analytical sensitivity and specificity. This method was applied to analyze 190 nail specimens, with the results compared with traditional microscopy and fungal culture.
resultsThe RPA-LFD assay demonstrated an analytical sensitivity of 10 pg/reaction for pan-dermatophytes and 1 pg/reaction for T. rubrum. In clinical evaluations for tinea unguium, the sensitivity of the RPA-LFD, fungal culture, and microscopy methods, as determined through latent class analysis, was estimated to be 91.0%, 70.8%, and 93.9%, respectively. Correspondingly, the specificity of these methods-RPA-LFD, fungal culture, and microscopy-was assessed at approximately 95.7%, 98.0%, and 94.3%.
conclusionsOur RPA-LFD assay exhibited high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of dermatophytes. Due to its technical simplicity, enhanced sensitivity, and reduced processing times, it represents a promising alternative to conventional fungal culture methods for the mycological detection and identification of dermatophytes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39738983What 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.