Cited by 205Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal and yeast genetics researchFungal Infections and Studies

Genome-wide expression profiling of the response to polyene, pyrimidine, azole, and echinocandin antifungal agents in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Open access
Agarwal, Ameeta K., Rogers, P.David, Baerson, Scott R., Jacob, Melissa R., Barker, Katherine S., Cleary, John D., Walker, Larry A., Nagle, Dale G. +1 more·2003·Journal of Biological Chemistry

Abstract

Antifungal compounds exert their activity through a variety of mechanisms, some of which are poorly understood. Novel approaches to characterize the mechanism of action of antifungal agents will be of great use in the antifungal drug development process. The aim of the present study was to investigate the changes in the gene expression profile of Saccharomyces cerevisiae following exposure to representatives of the four currently available classes of antifungal agents used in the management of systemic fungal infections. Microarray analysis indicated differential expression of 0.8, 4.1, 3.0, and 2.6% of the genes represented on the Affymetrix S98 yeast gene array in response to ketoconazole, amphotericin B, caspofungin, and 5-fluorocytosine (5-FC), respectively. Quantitative real time reverse transcriptase-PCR was used to confirm the microarray analyses. Genes responsive to ketoconazole, caspofungin, and 5-FC were indicative of the drug-specific effects. Ketoconazole exposure primarily affected genes involved in ergosterol biosynthesis and sterol uptake; caspofungin exposure affected genes involved in cell wall integrity; and 5-FC affected genes involved in DNA and protein synthesis, DNA damage repair, and cell cycle control. In contrast, amphotericin B elicited changes in gene expression reflecting cell stress, membrane reconstruction, transport, phosphate uptake, and cell wall integrity. Genes with the greatest specificity for a particular drug were grouped together as drug-specific genes, whereas genes with a lack of drug specificity were also identified. Taken together, these data shed new light on the mechanisms of action of these classes of antifungal agents and demonstrate the potential utility of gene expression profiling in antifungal drug development.

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 · 10.1074/jbc.m306291200

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Kelly, S. L., Arnoldi, A., and Kelly, D. E. (1993) Biochem. Soc. Trans. 21, 1034 -1038
  2. Barker, K. S., Pearson, M. M., and Rogers, P. D. (2003) J. Antimicrob. Che- mother. 51, 1131-1140
  3. Nau, G. J., Richmond, J. F. L., Schleisinger, A., Jennings, E. G., Lander, E. S., and Young, R. A. (2002) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99, 1503-1508
  4. Lee, M-L. T., Kuo, F. C., Whitmore, G. A., and Sklar, J. (2000) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 97, 9834 -9839
  5. Kaplun, L., Ivantsiv, Y., Kornitzer, D., and Raveh, D. (2000) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 97, 10077-10082

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Agarwal, A. K., Rogers, P. D., Baerson, S. R., Jacob, M. R., Barker, K. S., Cleary, J. D., Walker, L. A., Nagle, D. G., & Clark, A. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Mississippi (US)
  • University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US)
  • Agricultural Research Service (US)
  • University of Mississippi Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Agarwal, Ameeta K.
Venue
Journal of Biological Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-09
Volume
278
Issue
37
Pages
34998-35015
ISSN
0021-9258 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106248803
Cited by
204
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
FWCI
11.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Biological Chemistry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (58‐6408‐2‐0009)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • U.S. Public Health Service
  • Agricultural Research Service (58-6408-2- 0009)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01AI027094, R01-AI 27094, AI 27094)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
Keywords
antifungal agents, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, gene expression profiling, ketoconazole, amphotericin B, caspofungin, 5-fluorocytosine, polyene antibiotics, azole antifungals, echinocandins, ergosterol biosynthesis, cell wall integrity, DNA repair, cell cycle regulation, mechanism of action, antifungal drug development
MeSH terms
Anti-Bacterial Agents, Antifungal Agents, Azoles, Base Sequence, Ketoconazole, Peptides, Polyenes, Pyrimidines, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Structure-Activity Relationship, Gene Expression Regulation, Fungal, Genome, Fungal, DNA Primers, Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Gene Expression Profiling

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