ArticleEye (London, England)2026
Multidrug antifungal resistance and clinical outcomes in fungal keratitis: a prospective study in a South Indian population.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesOur primary objective was to identify the rate of antifungal resistance (including multidrug resistance) of fungal isolates cultured from fungal keratitis patients in South India. Our secondary objective was to identify associations between antifungal resistance and patient outcome. SUBJECTS/
methods153 patients attending the cornea clinic at Aravind Eye Hospital, Madurai (May-August 2025) with culture-positive fungal keratitis were enrolled in the study. Cultured isolates were evaluated for natamycin, amphotericin B, voriconazole and econazole minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC; n = 151-153). MIC data were analysed by Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Dunn's multiple comparisons. Patient disease outcome relative to isolate resistance was analysed by Fisher's exact test (n = 91).
resultsThere were high levels of resistance to all four antifungals, which were significantly elevated in Fusarium spp. and Aspergillus spp. isolates compared to other fungal genera (P < 0.0001). Fusarium spp. isolates (n = 81) resistant to: natamycin: 38.3%; amphotericin B: 93.8%; voriconazole: 97.5%; and econazole: 76.5%. Aspergillus spp. isolates (n = 33) resistant to: natamycin: 66.7%; amphotericin B: 87.9%; voriconazole: 6.1%; and econazole: 0%. Overall, fungal resistance to natamycin significantly correlated with an adverse clinical outcome, P = 0.0034, relative risk 1.7 (95% CI: 1.2-2.6).
conclusionsThe majority of fungal isolates were resistant to multiple antifungals; none of the Fusarium isolates were susceptible to all four drugs, and 28% were resistant to all of them. Resistance to natamycin may worsen clinical outcome, particularly for infections caused by Aspergillus, even when susceptible to azoles. Our data support the need for species-specific MIC thresholds to have increased clinical utility.
Identifiers
42823523What 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.