Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 498

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Antifungal Susceptibility Survey of 2,000 Bloodstream Candida Isolates in the United States

Open access
Ostrosky-Zeichner, Luis, Rex, John H., Pappas, Peter G., Hamill, Richard J., Larsen, Robert A., Horowitz, Harold W., Powderly, William G., Hyslop, Newton, Kauffman, Carol A., Cleary, John, Mangino, Julie E., Lee, Jeannette·2003·Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Abstract

Candida bloodstream isolates ( n = 2,000) from two multicenter clinical trials carried out by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group between 1995 and 1999 were tested against amphotericin B (AMB), flucytosine (5FC), fluconazole (FLU), itraconazole (ITR), voriconazole (VOR), posaconazole (POS), caspofungin (CFG), micafungin (MFG), and anidulafungin (AFG) using the NCCLS M27-A2 microdilution method. All drugs were tested in the NCCLS-specified RPMI 1640 medium except for AMB, which was tested in antibiotic medium 3. A sample of isolates was also tested in RPMI 1640 supplemented to 2% glucose and by using the diluent polyethylene glycol (PEG) in lieu of dimethyl sulfoxide for those drugs insoluble in water. Glucose supplementation tended to elevate the MIC, whereas using PEG tended to decrease the MIC. Trailing growth occurred frequently with azoles. Isolates were generally susceptible to AMB, 5FC, and FLU. Rates of resistance to ITR approached 20%. Although no established interpretative breakpoints are available for the candins (CFG, MFG, and AFG) and the new azoles (VOR and POS), they all exhibited excellent antifungal activity, even for those strains resistant to the other aforementioned agents.

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.47.10.3149-3154.2003

Cites

10 of 10 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 10 references

Cited by

See all 498

Metadata

Authors
Ostrosky-Zeichner, L., Rex, J. H., Pappas, P. G., Hamill, R. J., Larsen, R. A., Horowitz, H. W., Powderly, W. G., Hyslop, N., Kauffman, C. A., Cleary, J., Mangino, J. E., & Lee, J.
Venue
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Published
2003-10
Volume
47
Issue
10
Pages
3149-3154
ISSN
  • 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6596
OpenAlex
W2158530375
Cited by
498
References
10
FWCI
26.71
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 Susceptibility Survey of 2,000 Bloodstream Candida Isolates in the United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.47.10.3149-3154.2003
The paper
Ostrosky-Zeichner, L., Rex, J. H., Pappas, P. G., Hamill, R. J., Larsen, R. A., Horowitz, H. W., Powderly, W. G., Hyslop, N., Kauffman, C. A., Cleary, J., Mangino, J. E., & Lee, J. (2003). Antifungal Susceptibility Survey of 2,000 Bloodstream Candida Isolates in the United States. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.47.10.3149-3154.2003

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.