ArticleMycopathologia2025
Comparative Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Candida (Candidozyma) auris vs. Non-C. auris Candidemia in Non-neutropenic Patients in South India.
Article in Mycopathologia, 2025. 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.
- Changes in Epidemiology of Candidemia in the United States With a Focus on Candida auris.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026Article
- Risk Factors for Mortality Among Patients with Bloodstream Infection Caused byAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInvasive candidiasis is a serious healthcare associated infection with a high mortality rate. Emergence of the multi-drug-resistant species Candida (Candidozyma) auris over the past two decades poses further challenges. We aimed to study the epidemiology, clinical profile and outcomes of non-neutropenic adults with C. auris candidemia in comparison with candidemia due to other species.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study of all non-neutropenic adult patients admitted to our tertiary care centre with blood culture proven candidemia between January 2019 and September 2024. We retrospectively collected their clinical data and investigation records via hospital's electronic records and document management systems.
resultsOut of a total of 372 candidemia episodes, 85 (22.8%) were caused by C. auris, which was the second most common species after C.tropicalis. The incidence of candidemia overall as well as C. auris candidemia increased during the SARS-COV2 pandemic. In comparison to other species, C. auris candidemia was associated with prolonged hospital stay, prior antifungal exposure, a lower SOFA score and was common in patients on ECMO. Candida endocarditis was associated with persistent candidemia and long, tunnelled lines. C. auris showed 100% resistance to fluconazole and very low rate of susceptibility to amphotericin B: only echinocandins were reliably effective. A negative beta-D glucan (BDG) value was seen in a quarter of patients with both C. auris as well as with other species. Overall survival at 28 days was only 40%. Advanced age and a high SOFA score were associated with higher mortality. C. auris was associated with a lower mortality overall but was not associated with higher mortality in a multi-variate analysis.
conclusionMulti-drug-resistant Candida (Candidozyma) auris has emerged as a major nosocomial pathogen in Indian ICUs since the SARS-COV-2 pandemic, especially later in the course of hospital stay and with prior antifungal exposure. A negative BDG result alone cannot be used for withholding or discontinuing antifungals. Echinocandins are the empiric antifungals of choice for candidemia in view of the current epidemiology and resistance profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40815478What 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.