Cited by 91Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFungal Plant Pathogen Control

Use of Epidemiological Cutoff Values To Examine 9-Year Trends in Susceptibility of Aspergillus Species to the Triazoles

Open access
Pfaller, M., Boyken, L., Hollis, R., Kroeger, J., Messer, S., Tendolkar, S., Diekema, D.·2011·Journal of Clinical Microbiology

Abstract

In the absence of clinical breakpoints, epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) have been established to distinguish wild-type (WT) isolates of Aspergillus spp. from those that may harbor resistance mutations. Recently, the CLSI has developed ECVs for triazoles (itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole) and common Aspergillus species. We applied the triazole ECVs to 1,789 Aspergillus isolates collected from 63 centers worldwide from 2001 to 2009 to determine the frequency of non-WT strains of each species. Temporal trends were evaluated for Aspergillus fumigatus and Aspergillus flavus over the 9-year period for each drug. The collection included 1,312 isolates of A. fumigatus , 235 of A. flavus , 162 of Aspergillus niger , 64 of Aspergillus terreus , and 15 of Aspergillus versicolor . Using the ECVs, the percentages of non-WT isolates for itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole, respectively, were as follows: A. fumigatus (2.0%, 3.5%, and 1.4%), A. flavus (0.8%, 5.1%, and 1.7%), A. niger (17.3%, 3.7%, and 0.6%), A. terreus (0.0%, 1.6%, and 3.2%), and A. versicolor (6.3%, 0.0%, and 0.0%). Among 49 Aspergillus isolates for which itraconazole MICs were >2 μg/ml, the posaconazole and voriconazole MICs were greater than the ECVs for 14 and 12 isolates, respectively. The percentages of isolates for which MICs were greater than the ECVs ranged from 1.1 to 5.7% for posaconazole, 0.0 to 1.6% for voriconazole, and 0.7 to 4.0% for itraconazole. There was no consistent trend toward decreased susceptibility for any triazole and A. fumigatus or A. flavus over time. Decreased susceptibility among Aspergillus spp. was observed for each of the extended-spectrum triazoles and varied by species over the 9-year study period.

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/jcm.02136-10

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • In the US, fluconazole resistance rates in C. parapsilosis range between 4-10%.

    “In the US, fluconazole resistance rates range between 4–10%; rates are much higher in other parts of the world including Japan, Western Europe, and Latin America.”

    From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis (2024) · cites this paper as [120]

    The Results and Discussion passages report susceptibility of Aspergillus species to itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. Searches for fluconazole, C. parapsilosis, and the stated geographic comparison found no passage reporting the claimed US resistance rate. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Resistance to the echinocandins in C. parapsilosis has remained relatively infrequent (0-3%).

    “Resistance to the echinocandins has remained relatively infrequent (0–3%) despite a higher baseline susceptible MIC cutoff value compared to the other Candida spp. due to a naturally occurring polymorphism in FKS1.62,103,112,120”

    From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis (2024) · cites this paper as [120]

    The Results and Discussion section (page unavailable) examines triazole susceptibility in Aspergillus species, not echinocandin resistance in C. parapsilosis. Searches for C. parapsilosis, echinocandins, the 0–3% figure, and FKS1 found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Fluconazole resistance rates in C. parapsilosis are much higher in Japan, Western Europe, and Latin America than in the US.

    “In the US, fluconazole resistance rates range between 4–10%; rates are much higher in other parts of the world including Japan, Western Europe, and Latin America.”

    From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis (2024) · cites this paper as [120]

    The Results and Discussion passages report susceptibility of Aspergillus species to itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole; no page numbers are provided. Searches for C. parapsilosis, fluconazole, and the claimed regional resistance rates found no passage addressing that comparison. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • C. parapsilosis has a higher baseline susceptible MIC cutoff value compared to other Candida spp. due to a naturally occurring polymorphism in FKS1.

    “Resistance to the echinocandins has remained relatively infrequent (0–3%) despite a higher baseline susceptible MIC cutoff value compared to the other Candida spp. due to a naturally occurring polymorphism in FKS1.62,103,112,120”

    From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis (2024) · cites this paper as [120]

    The Materials and Methods mention C. parapsilosis only as a quality-control strain, while the Results and Discussion concern Aspergillus susceptibility to triazoles (page numbers unavailable). Searches for FKS1 polymorphisms, echinocandin MIC cutoffs, and the 0–3% resistance figure found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [6]6. CLSI 2008. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi, 2nd ed Approved standard M38-A2. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pfaller, M., Boyken, L., Hollis, R., Kroeger, J., Messer, S., Tendolkar, S., & Diekema, D.
Affiliations
University of Iowa (US)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Published
2011-02
Volume
49
Issue
2
Pages
586-590
ISSN
  • 0095-1137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-660X
OpenAlex
W2098654234
Cited by
91
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
FWCI
5.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Pfizer
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Medicine › Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
Keywords
Aspergillus, triazole antifungals, epidemiological cut-off values, antifungal susceptibility, itraconazole, posaconazole, voriconazole, Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus terreus, Aspergillus versicolor, resistance mutations, temporal trends
MeSH terms
Antifungal Agents, Aspergillosis, Aspergillus, Humans, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Triazoles, 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