Cited by 202Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies

Comparison of Etest and National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards broth macrodilution method for antifungal susceptibility testing: enhanced ability to detect amphotericin B-resistant Candida isolates

Open access
Wanger, A, Mills, K, Nelson, P W, Rex, J H·1995·Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Abstract

The National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) proposed macrobroth reference method (M27P) for susceptibility testing of yeasts is technically difficult. We evaluated Etest, a simple agar-based MIC methodology, as a possible alternative. In studies of six yeast quality control strains, Etest yielded results identical to those obtained by the NCCLS reference method for both amphotericin B and fluconazole. In studies of 91 clinical Candida isolates, agreement +/- 2 dilutions between the two methods was 95% for fluconazole with phosphate-buffered RPMI 1640 agar and 96 to 97% for amphotericin B with either MOPS (morpholinepropanesulfonic acid)-buffered RPMI 1640 agar or antibiotic medium 3 agar. While the two methods had excellent general agreement, testing of a collection of amphotericin B-resistant isolates demonstrated that, unlike the NCCLS reference method, Etest readily identified the resistant isolates and could do so with a defined medium. Etest is equivalent to the NCCLS proposed method for susceptibility testing of yeasts and superior in its ability to detect amphotericin B resistance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aac.39.11.2520

Cites

11 of 11 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?

  • Variations of the M27-A2 methodology using different media, agar-based MIC methods, and measurements of minimum fungicidal concentrations appear to enhance detection of resistant isolates.

    “Variations of the M27-A2 methodology using different media [6], agar-based MIC methods [12,35,36], and measurements of minimum fungicidal concentrations [11] appear to enhance detection of resistant isolates.”

    From Guidelines for Treatment of Candidiasis (2004) · cites this paper as [12]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wanger, A., Mills, K., Nelson, P. W., & Rex, J. H.
Affiliations
Department of Pathology, University of Texas Medical School, Houston, USA.
Venue
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Published
1995-11
Volume
39
Issue
11
Pages
2520-2522
ISSN
  • 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6596
OpenAlex
W2142450445
Cited by
202
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 11
FWCI
8.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Yeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Keywords
E-test, antifungal susceptibility testing, Candida, amphotericin B resistance, fluconazole, broth macrodilution, minimum inhibitory concentration, measurement agreement
MeSH terms
Amphotericin B, Anti-Infective Agents, Antifungal Agents, Candida, Culture Media, Drug Resistance, Microbial, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Quality Control, Fluconazole, Fluoroquinolones

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