Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 404

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Antifungal Activities of Posaconazole, Ravuconazole, and Voriconazole Compared to Those of Itraconazole and Amphotericin B against 239 Clinical Isolates of Aspergillus spp. and Other Filamentous Fungi: Report from SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 2000

Open access
Pfaller, M. A., Messer, S. A., Hollis, R. J., Jones, R. N.·2002·Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Abstract

Posaconazole, ravuconazole, and voriconazole are new triazole derivatives that possess potent, broad-spectrum antifungal activity. We evaluated the in vitro activity of these investigational triazoles compared with that of itraconazole and amphotericin B against 239 clinical isolates of filamentous fungi from the SENTRY Program, including Aspergillus spp. (198 isolates), Fusarium spp. (7 isolates), Penicillium spp. (19 isolates), Rhizopus spp. (4 isolates), Mucor spp. (2 isolates), and miscellaneous species (9 isolates). The isolates were obtained from 16 different medical centers in the United States and Canada between January and December 2000. In vitro susceptibility testing was performed using the microdilution broth method outlined in the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M38-P document. Overall, posaconazole was the most active compound, inhibiting 94% of isolates at a MIC of ≤1 μg/ml, followed by voriconazole (91%), amphotericin B (89%), ravuconazole (88%), and itraconazole (70%). All three new triazoles demonstrated excellent activity (MIC, ≤1 μg/ml) against Aspergillus spp. (114 Aspergillus fumigatus , 22 Aspergillus niger , 13 Aspergillus flavus , 9 Aspergillus versicolor , 8 Aspergillus terreus , and 32 Aspergillus spp.): posaconazole (98%), voriconazole (98%), ravuconazole (92%), amphotericin B (89%), and itraconazole (72%). None of the triazoles were active against Fusarium spp. (MIC at which 50% of the isolates tested were inhibited [MIC 50 ], >8 μg/ml) or Mucor spp. (MIC 50 , >8 μg/ml). Posaconazole and ravuconazole were more active than voriconazole against Rhizopus spp. (MIC 50 , 1 to 2 μg/ml versus >8 μg/ml, respectively). Based on these results, all three new triazoles exhibited promising activity against Aspergillus spp. and other less commonly encountered isolates of filamentous fungi. The clinical value of these in vitro data remains to be seen, and in vitro-in vivo correlation is needed for both new and established antifungal agents. Surveillance efforts should be expanded in order to monitor the spectrum of filamentous fungal pathogens and their in vitro susceptibility as these new antifungal agents are introduced into clinical use.

Overview

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 · 10.1128/aac.46.4.1032-1037.2002

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 404

Metadata

Authors
Pfaller, M. A., Messer, S. A., Hollis, R. J., & Jones, R. N.
Venue
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Published
2002-04
Volume
46
Issue
4
Pages
1032-1037
ISSN
  • 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6596
OpenAlex
W2127806652
Cited by
404
References
6
FWCI
26.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Antifungal Activities of Posaconazole, Ravuconazole, and Voriconazole Compared to Those of Itraconazole and Amphotericin B against 239 Clinical Isolates of Aspergillus spp. and Other Filamentous Fungi: Report from SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 2000. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.46.4.1032-1037.2002
The paper
Pfaller, M. A., Messer, S. A., Hollis, R. J., & Jones, R. N. (2002). Antifungal Activities of Posaconazole, Ravuconazole, and Voriconazole Compared to Those of Itraconazole and Amphotericin B against 239 Clinical Isolates of Aspergillus spp. and Other Filamentous Fungi: Report from SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 2000. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.46.4.1032-1037.2002

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.