ArticleJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Evaluation of Serum Biomarkers for Improved Diagnosis of Candidemia.
Article in Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Analytical performance of species-targeted quantitative PCR for intra-abdominal candidiasis in critically ill patients: a proof-of-concept post hoc analysis from the pBDG2 multicenter study.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Candidemia: An Update on Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Diagnosis, Susceptibility, and Treatment.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Early-Onset Candidemia in Adult Intensive Care Units.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCandidemia, associated with high morbidity and mortality, remains challenging to diagnose due to the limitations of blood cultures. Serological biomarkers offer faster detection, enabling earlier treatment and improving outcomes.
methodsThis study, conducted at CHU UCL Namur (August 2023-January 2025), evaluated three diagnostic biomarkers for candidemia: CAGTA IgG VirClia Monotest, Wako β-D-glucan test, and CandId OLM RT-PCR. A total of 35 candidemia cases and 20 controls were included.
resultsCAGTA IgG VirClia Monotest demonstrated low sensitivity (46%) and moderate specificity (75%). Both Wako β-D-glucan test and CandId OLM RT-PCR exhibited higher sensitivity (74% and 71%, respectively) and excellent specificity (100%). The combined use of Wako β-D-glucan test and CandId OLM RT-PCR further enhanced diagnostic performance, achieving 91% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Misidentification between
conclusionsBoth Wako β-D-glucan test and CandID OLM RT-PCR outperformed CAGTA IgG VirClia Monotest in diagnosing candidemia, and their combination significantly improved diagnostic accuracy, albeit at a higher cost. These findings highlight the potential of integrating multiple biomarkers into diagnostic workflows to optimize early detection, though further studies are needed to refine strategies and address challenges.
Indexed as
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.