Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8904400›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical microbiology1996

Susceptibility testing of fungi: current status of correlation of in vitro data with clinical outcome.

M A Ghannoum, J H Rex, J N Galgiani

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
17.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 161 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M A GhannoumDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Harbor-University of California, Los Angeles, USA. ghannoum@humc.edu
J H Rex
J N Galgiani
University of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In summary, it is clear that in vitro susceptibility testing can predict outcome in selected clinical situations. The clearest data are from the fluconazole-treated AIDS patients with oropharyngeal candidiasis. In this setting, the homogeneity of the underlying immune defect, combined with the ease of identification and monitoring of the infection, creates a near-perfect test situation. In more complex scenarios, such as the heterogeneous population of patients enrolled in a recent study of candidemia, no such clear-cut correlation was present. The importance of host factors in the correlation of the MIC with outcome cannot be overemphasized. Examples of these parameters include patient status (underlying disease, the presence of intravascular catheters, and CD4+ T-cell number), drug pharmacokinetics (absorption and distribution), patient compliance, and drug-drug interactions. Identification of relevant factors can substantially improve the degree of the MIC-outcome correlation and thus improve the clinical utility of in vitro testing. An important feature in this entire process is the role of standardized susceptibility testing procedures. While not without flaws, the proposed NCCLS reference method has been invaluable in allowing multiple investigators to contribute data that can be used to clarify the correlation between the fluconazole MIC and outcome. While the development of simplified second-generation methods is eagerly anticipated, the role of the reference method as a common touchstone is critical. Only by use of either the reference method itself or methods with a known relationship to the reference method can this broad collaborative process really proceed. Current work is focusing on defining interpretive breakpoints for fluconazole and Candida species, refinement of the in vitro procedures used to measure susceptibility to amphotericin B, ketoconazole, and itraconazole, and the acquisition of a broad base of data on the relationship between the MIC and outcome for these three drugs. Although considerable work remains to be done, the available data suggest that solutions to each of these problems are possible and that routine susceptibility testing of fungi will become meaningful for clinical decision making in the foreseeable future.

Indexed as

Microbial Sensitivity TestsAmphotericin BAnimalsFluconazoleFungiHumansMycosesAmphotericin BFluconazole

Identifiers

PMID8904400
PMCPMC228832
OpenAlexW2131355745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.