The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of a novel colorimetric broth microdilution method for antifungal susceptibility testing of yeast isolates
Open accessAbstract
A comparative evaluation of two broth microdilution methods for antifungal susceptibility testing of 600 clinical yeast isolates (Candida spp., Torulopsis glabrata, and Cryptococcus neoformans) against amphotericin B, fluconazole, and flucytosine (5FC) was conducted. Microdilution testing was performed according to National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) recommendations (NCCLS document M27-P). By using the growth control for comparison, reference microdilution MIC endpoints for amphotericin B were scored as the lowest concentration at which a score of 0 (complete absence of growth) was observed, and those for 5FC and fluconazole were scored at the lowest concentration at which a score of 2 (prominent decrease in turbidity) (MIC-2) was observed. The second microdilution method employed a colorimetric endpoint using an oxidation-reduction indicator (Alamar Biosciences, Inc., Sacramento, Calif.) and was assessed independently of the reference microdilution MICs. The MICs for the two microdilution test systems were read after 24 and 48 h of incubation. Excellent agreement between the reference and colorimetric microdilution MICs was observed. Overall agreement was > or = 95% for all three drugs at 24 h. At 48 h, agreement was > or = 98% for amphotericin B and 5FC but dropped to 84% for fluconazole. Given these results it appears that the colorimetric microdilution approach to antifungal susceptibility testing may be viable alternative to the NCCLS reference method for testing yeasts.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Collins, L., & Franzblau, S. G. (1997) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.41.5.1004 · Cited by 1,599
Palomino, J.-C., Martin, A., Camacho, M., Guerra, H., Swings, J., & Portaels, F. (2002) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.46.8.2720-2722.2002 · Cited by 1,229
Current and emerging azole antifungal agents
Sheehan, D. J., Hitchcock, C. A., & Sibley, C. M. (1999) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.12.1.40 · Cited by 1,137
Rex, J. H., Pfaller, M. A., Galgiani, J. N., Bartlett, M. S., Espinel-Ingroff, A., Ghannoum, M. A., Lancaster, M., Odds, F. C., Rinaldi, M. G., Walsh, T. J., et al. (1997) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/clinids/24.2.235 · Cited by 855
Self-citationSanglard, D., Kuchler, K., Ischer, F., Pagani, J. L., Monod, M., & Bille, J. (1995) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.39.11.2378 · Cited by 815
Metadata
- Authors
- Pfaller, M. A., & Barry, A. L.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 1994-08
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1992-1996
- ISSN
- 0095-1137 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-660X
- OpenAlex
- W1518896482
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.38
- 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: Evaluation of a novel colorimetric broth microdilution method for antifungal susceptibility testing of yeast isolates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jcm.32.8.1992-1996.1994
- The paper
- Pfaller, M. A., & Barry, A. L. (1994). Evaluation of a novel colorimetric broth microdilution method for antifungal susceptibility testing of yeast isolates. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.32.8.1992-1996.1994
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.