SynthesisMycoses2025
Analysis of Susceptibility and Drug Resistance of Antifungal Agents in Aspergillosis and Mucormycosis Patients: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Mycoses, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectivesTo evaluate the susceptibility and resistance of Aspergillus and Mucorales isolates to antifungal agents.
methodsStudies in susceptibility or resistance of Aspergillus and Mucorales isolates to antifungal agents published between January 2010 and June 2023 were systematically searched in PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), susceptibility and resistance data were analysed using CLSI or EUCAST methods.
resultsAfter following the systematic review processes, 96 studies were included. The total number of isolates was 16,258. Compared with existing MIC distributions and breakpoints or epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) established by CLSI or EUCAST, for A. flavus, the posaconazole and voriconazole MIC values were at or below the ECV, indicating that the isolates were wild-type (WT) strains; however, the amphotericin B, isavuconazole and itraconazole MIC values were elevated. For A. fumigatus, the isavuconazole MIC values were within ECV limits, indicating that the isolates were WT strains; however, the amphotericin B, posaconazole and voriconazole MIC values were elevated. For A. niger, the isavuconazole and voriconazole MIC values were within ECV limits, indicating that the isolates were WT strains; however, the amphotericin B and posaconazole MIC values were elevated. A. flavus had consistently high in vitro susceptibility to voriconazole, and A. fumigatus and A. niger had consistently high in vitro susceptibility to amphotericin B. For Mucorales, the resistance to amphotericin B was consistently at the lowest level. The subgroup analysis indicated that the resistance among the strains in the environment was higher than that of the clinical isolates.
conclusionTrends in susceptibility and resistance of Aspergillus and Mucorales isolates should be adequately considered in antifungal therapy. The evaluation of drug resistance is beneficial in that it enables clinicians to choose suitable drugs and appropriate doses.
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.