Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9227863›Full record

ReviewClinical microbiology reviews1997

Antifungal prophylaxis during neutropenia and immunodeficiency.

O Lortholary, B Dupont

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Rapid identification of fungi from respiratory samples by Bruker Biotyper matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight using ID-FUNGI plates.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Emerging Issues in Nosocomial Fungal Infections.Current infectious disease reports · 1999
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Current and emerging azole antifungal agents.Clinical microbiology reviews · 1999
    Review
  20. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

O LortholaryService de Médecine Interne, Hôpital Avicenne, Université Paris-Nord, Bobigny, France.
B Dupont
Hôpital Avicenne · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fungal infections represent a major source of morbidity and mortality in patients with almost all types of immunodeficiencies. These infections may be nosocomial (aspergillosis) or community acquired (cryptococcosis), or both (candidiasis). Endemic mycoses such as histoplasmosis, coccidioidomycosis, and penicilliosis may infect many immunocompromised hosts in some geographic areas and thereby create major public health problems. With the wide availability of oral azoles, antifungal prophylactic strategies have been extensively developed. However, only a few well-designed studies involving strict criteria have been performed, mostly in patients with hematological malignancies or AIDS. In these situations, the best dose and duration of administration of the antifungal drug often remain to be determined. In high-risk neutropenic or bone marrow transplant patients, fluconazole is effective for the prevention of superficial and/or systemic candidal infections but is not always able to prolong overall survival and potentially selects less susceptible or resistant Candida spp. Primary prophylaxis against aspergillosis remains investigative. At present, no standard general recommendation for primary antifungal prophylaxis can be proposed for AIDS patients or transplant recipients. However, for persistently immunocompromised patients who previously experienced a noncandidal systemic fungal infection, prolonged suppressive antifungal therapy is often indicated to prevent a relapse. Better strategies for controlling immune deficiencies should also help to avoid some potentially life-threatening deep mycoses. When prescribing antifungal prophylaxis, physicians should be aware of the potential emergence of resistant strains, drug-drug interactions, and the cost. Well-designed, randomized, multicenter clinical trials in high-risk immunocompromised hosts are urgently needed to better define how to prevent severe invasive mycoses.

Indexed as

Immunocompromised HostAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntifungal AgentsAspergillosisCandidiasisCryptococcosisCryptococcus neoformansHIV InfectionsHumansMacrolidesMucormycosisMycosesNeutropeniaTransplantationTransplantation ImmunologyAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntifungal AgentsMacrolides

Identifiers

PMID9227863
PMCPMC172931
OpenAlexW2117608450

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.