Cited by 49Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFungal Plant Pathogen Control

EUCAST technical note on Amphotericin B

Open access
Lass-Flörl, C., Arendrup, M.C., Rodriguez-Tudela, J.-L., Cuenca-Estrella, M., Donnelly, P., Hope, W.·2011·Clinical Microbiology and Infection

Abstract

The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing-Subcommittee on Antifungal Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST-AFST) has determined breakpoints for amphotericin B for Candida spp. This Technical Note is based on the EUCAST amphotericin B rationale document (available on the EUCAST website: http://www.eucast.org). Species-specific breakpoints for C. albicans, C. glabrata, C. krusei, C. parapsilosis and C. tropicalis are S: MIC ≤1 mg/L, R: MIC > 1 mg/L. There are insufficient data to set breakpoints for other species. The breakpoints are based upon pharmacokinetic data, epidemiological cut-ff values and clinical experience. Breakpoints will be reviewed regularly.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03644.x

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

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Based on pharmacokinetic data and epidemiological cut-off values, C. albicans, C. tropicalis, C. parapsilosis, C. glabrata, and C. krusei isolates with MIC > 1 mg/L are assumed to be resistant to amphotericin B.

    “Based on pharmacokinetic data and epidemiological cut-off values, C. albicans, C. tropicalis, C. parapsilosis, C. glabrata, and C. krusei isolates with MIC > 1 mg/L are assumed to be resistant to amphotericin B [31,62].”

    From Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis: A Narrative Review (2018) · cites this paper as [62]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lass-Flörl, C., Arendrup, M. C., Rodriguez-Tudela, J.-L., Cuenca-Estrella, M., Donnelly, P., & Hope, W.
Affiliations
  • Statens Serum Institut (DK)
  • Centro Nacional de Microbiologia (ES)
  • Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
Venue
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-12
Volume
17
Issue
12
Pages
E27-E29
ISSN
1198-743X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1934077280
Cited by
49
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Microbiology and Infection (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Università Politecnica delle Marche (Università Politecnica delle Marche) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
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 › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
Keywords
amphotericin B, antimicrobial susceptibility breakpoints, Candida, antifungal susceptibility testing, Candida albicans, Candida glabrata, Candida krusei, Candida parapsilosis, Candida tropicalis, minimum inhibitory concentration
MeSH terms
Amphotericin B, Antifungal Agents, Candida, Candidiasis, Humans, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Drug Resistance, Fungal

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