Cited by 12Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies

The impact of new epidemiological cutoff values on Candida glabrata resistance rates and concordance between testing methods

Ben-Ami, Ronen, Hilerowicz, Yuval, Novikov, Anna, Giladi, Michael·2014·Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease

Abstract

Interpretive criteria for Candida susceptibility testing were recently revised with the establishment of species-specific epidemiological cutoff values (ECV). To assess the effect of modified cutoff values on Candida glabrata resistance rates and agreement between testing methods, we tested the susceptibility of 598 clinical isolates to fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole, caspofungin, and amphotericin B using CLSI M27-A3 and E-test methods. The caspofungin MICs clustered above the ECV and below the CLSI cutoff (MIC50, 0.5 μg/mL). Applying the ECV reduced the proportion of itraconazole-nonsusceptible strains from 83% to 0.3% but minimally affected resistance rates of other drugs. Categorical agreement between broth microdilution and E-test was increased for itraconazole and reduced for voriconazole and caspofungin. The current caspofungin ECV may not reproducibly differentiate resistant and susceptible C. glabrata strains in hospitals with varying MIC distributions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2014.02.008

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Caspofungin is unreliable for MIC determination due to high interlaboratory variability.

    “Caspofungin has been found to be unreliable for MIC determination due to high interlaboratory variability [33,34,35,36].”

    From Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis: A Narrative Review (2018) · cites this paper as [33]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 27 · Cited by 12

Authors
Ben-Ami, R., Hilerowicz, Y., Novikov, A., & Giladi, M.
Affiliations
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center (IL)
Venue
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-06
Volume
79
Issue
2
Pages
209-213
ISSN
0732-8893 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2092156735
Cited by
12
References
27
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Pfizer Pharmaceuticals
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Yeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Keywords
Candida glabrata, epidemiological cut-off values, antifungal susceptibility testing, itraconazole resistance, caspofungin, voriconazole, fluconazole, posaconazole, amphotericin B, interpretation criteria, measurement agreement, clinical isolates, MIC distribution
MeSH terms
Antifungal Agents, Candidiasis, Female, Humans, Male, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Reproducibility of Results, Prevalence, Drug Resistance, Fungal, Candida glabrata

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review