Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,345

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Posaconazole or Fluconazole for Prophylaxis in Severe Graft-versus-Host Disease

Open access
Ullmann, Andrew J., Lipton, Jeffrey H., Vesole, David H., Chandrasekar, Pranatharthi, Langston, Amelia, Tarantolo, Stefano R., Greinix, Hildegard, Morais de Azevedo, Wellington, Reddy, Vijay, Boparai, Navdeep, Pedicone, Lisa, Patino, Hernando, Durrant, Simon·2007·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal infections are an important cause of morbidity and mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. METHODS: In an international, randomized, double-blind trial, we compared oral posaconazole with oral fluconazole for prophylaxis against invasive fungal infections in patients with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) who were receiving immunosuppressive therapy. The primary end point was the incidence of proven or probable invasive fungal infections from randomization to day 112 of the fixed treatment period of the study. RESULTS: Of a total of 600 patients, 301 were assigned to posaconazole and 299 to fluconazole. At the end of the fixed 112-day treatment period, posaconazole was found to be as effective as fluconazole in preventing all invasive fungal infections (incidence, 5.3% and 9.0%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.56; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 0.30 to 1.07; P=0.07) and was superior to fluconazole in preventing proven or probable invasive aspergillosis (2.3% vs. 7.0%; odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.75; P=0.006). While patients were receiving study medications (exposure period), in the posaconazole group, as compared with the fluconazole group, there were fewer breakthrough invasive fungal infections (2.4% vs. 7.6%, P=0.004), particularly invasive aspergillosis (1.0% vs. 5.9%, P=0.001). Overall mortality was similar in the two groups, but the number of deaths from invasive fungal infections was lower in the posaconazole group (1%, vs. 4% in the fluconazole group; P=0.046). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (36% in the posaconazole group and 38% in the fluconazole group), and the rates of treatment-related serious adverse events were 13% and 10%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Posaconazole was similar to fluconazole for prophylaxis against fungal infections among patients with GVHD. It was superior in preventing invasive aspergillosis and reducing the rate of deaths related to fungal infections. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00034645 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa061098

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 1,345

Metadata

Authors
Ullmann, A. J., Lipton, J. H., Vesole, D. H., Chandrasekar, P., Langston, A., Tarantolo, S. R., Greinix, H., Morais de Azevedo, W., Reddy, V., Boparai, N., Pedicone, L., Patino, H., & Durrant, S.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2007-01-25
Volume
356
Issue
4
Pages
335-347
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1988385266
Cited by
1,345
References
5
FWCI
81.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Posaconazole or Fluconazole for Prophylaxis in Severe Graft-versus-Host Disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa061098
The paper
Ullmann, A. J., Lipton, J. H., Vesole, D. H., Chandrasekar, P., Langston, A., Tarantolo, S. R., Greinix, H., Morais de Azevedo, W., Reddy, V., Boparai, N., Pedicone, L., Patino, H., & Durrant, S. (2007). Posaconazole or Fluconazole for Prophylaxis in Severe Graft-versus-Host Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa061098

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.