ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2025
Identification and antifungal susceptibility patterns of reference yeast strains to novel and conventional agents: a comparative study using CLSI, EUCAST and Sensititre YeastOne methods.
Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Sensititre YeastOne for antifungal susceptibility testing ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Diutina cutanea sp. nov.-phylogenomic-based analysis of a novel clinically relevant ascomycetous yeast.Medical mycology · 2026Article
- Rezafungin: an opportunity to personalize the treatment of patients with candidemia.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Antibiofilm activity of manogepix, ibrexafungerp, amphotericin B, rezafungin, and caspofungin againstAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify and determine the MICs of 13 antifungal drugs, including the novel agents ibrexafungerp, manogepix and rezafungin, against 22 laboratory reference strains from 14 different Results: Complete agreement between molecular and proteomics methods was observed for identification. The compounds with the greatest Conclusions: The high EA observed reinforces the reliability of EUCAST, CLSI and SYO in guiding antifungal therapy. However, the differences in EA, particularly for ibrexafungerp and 5-flucytosine, highlight the importance of continued evaluation of these methodologies to ensure consistency. Given that antifungal susceptibility testing plays a critical role in treatment decisions, understanding these variations is essential to prevent potential misclassification of susceptibility profiles, which could impact clinical outcomes.
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.