Cited by 99Ocular Infections and TreatmentsAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityInfective Endocarditis Diagnosis and Management

Subtherapeutic ocular penetration of caspofungin and associated treatment failure in Candida albicans endophthalmitis

Gauthier, G. M., Nork, T. M., Prince, R., Andes, D.·2005·Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Candida endophthalmitis represents the most serious ocular complication of candidemia. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of fluconazole, amphotericin B, and flucytosine are fairly well established in endophthalmitis therapy. There remains a paucity of clinical data regarding the utility of new antimycotic agents in the treatment of fungal chorioretinitis and endophthalmitis. We report a case of clinical failure of caspofungin in the management of Candida albicans endophthalmitis associated with poor vitreous penetration.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/431761

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Endophthalmitis is a not uncommon complication in patients with candidemia, with an incidence ranging from 3% to 28% in prospective studies, and carries significant morbidity.

    “Endophthalmitis is a not uncommon complication in patients with candidemia, with an incidence ranging from 3% to 28% in prospective studies, and carries significant morbidity.”
  • For fluconazole-resistant isolates, liposomal amphotericin B is preferred over echinocandins, which achieve suboptimal vitreous concentrations.

    “For fluconazole-resistant isolates, liposomal amphotericin B is preferred over echinocandins, which achieve suboptimal vitreous concentrations [109,110].”

    From Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis: A Narrative Review (2018) · cites this paper as [110]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gauthier, G. M., Nork, T. M., Prince, R., & Andes, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of Houston (US)
Venue
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2005-08-01
Volume
41
Issue
3
Pages
e27-e28
ISSN
  • 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6591
OpenAlex
W2124127923
Cited by
99
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
5.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Infections and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Infective Endocarditis Diagnosis and Management
Keywords
caspofungin, Candida albicans, fungal endophthalmitis, ocular penetration, treatment failure, antifungal pharmacokinetics, candidemia
MeSH terms
Caspofungin, Adult, Amphotericin B, Antifungal Agents, Candidiasis, Drug Combinations, Humans, Male, Endophthalmitis, Peptides, Cyclic, Phosphatidylcholines, Phosphatidylglycerols, Treatment Failure, Echinocandins, Lipopeptides

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