Cited by 538Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal Infections and StudiesNeutropenia and Cancer Infections

-D-Glucan Assay for the Diagnosis of Invasive Fungal Infections: A Meta-analysis

Karageorgopoulos, D. E., Vouloumanou, E. K., Ntziora, F., Michalopoulos, A., Rafailidis, P. I., Falagas, M. E.·2011·Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract

We aimed to assess the accuracy of measuring serum or plasma (1→3)-β-D-glucan (BDG) for the diagnosis of invasive fungal infections (IFIs) by means of a meta-analysis of relevant studies. We searched in bibliographic databases for relevant cohort or case-control studies. We primarily compared BDG between patients with proven or probable IFIs (excluding Pneumocystis jirovecii infections), according to the criteria of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group or similar criteria, and patients without IFIs (excluding healthy individuals as controls). A total of 2979 patients (594 with proven or probable IFIs), included in 16 studies, were analyzed. The pooled sensitivity of BDG was 76.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67.1%-84.3%), and the specificity was 85.3% (95% CI, 79.6%-89.7%). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.89. Marked statistical heterogeneity was noted. BDG has good diagnostic accuracy for distinguishing proven or probable IFIs from no IFIs. It can be useful in clinical practice, if implemented in the proper setting and interpreted after consideration of its limitations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cid/ciq206

Cites

55 of 55 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?

  • A meta-analysis of 16 trials found a pooled sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 85% for (1,3)-β-d-glucan.

    “A meta-analysis of 16 trials found a pooled sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 85% [80]; false positive results are attributed to the ubiquity of glucans in the environment.”

    From Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis: A Narrative Review (2018) · cites this paper as [80]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Karageorgopoulos, D. E., Vouloumanou, E. K., Ntziora, F., Michalopoulos, A., Rafailidis, P. I., & Falagas, M. E.
Affiliations
  • Laiko General Hospital of Athens (GR)
  • Alfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences (GR)
  • Henry Dunant Hospital (GR)
  • Tufts University (US)
Venue
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2011-03-01
Volume
52
Issue
6
Pages
750-770
ISSN
  • 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6591
OpenAlex
W2056588441
Cited by
538
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 31
FWCI
5.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Neutropenia and Cancer Infections
Keywords
β-1,3-glucan, invasive fungal infections, diagnostic accuracy, serum biomarkers, sensitivity and specificity, fungal infection diagnosis, EORTC/MSG criteria
MeSH terms
Humans, Mycoses, Plasma, Proteoglycans, ROC Curve, Sensitivity and Specificity, Biomarkers, Clinical Laboratory Techniques, Serum, beta-Glucans

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