4.7 Article

Global trends in the antifungal susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans (1990 to 2004)

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 2163-2167

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.5.2163-2167.2005

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The antifungal susceptibilities of 1,811 clinical isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans obtained from 100 laboratories in 5 geographic regions worldwide between 1990 and 2004 were determined. The MICs of amphotericin 13, flucytosine, fluconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole, and ravuconazole were determined by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards broth microdilution method. Isolates were submitted to a central reference laboratory (University of Iowa) from study centers in Africa (5 centers, 395 isolates), Europe (14 centers, 102 isolates), Latin America (14 centers, 82 isolates), the Pacific region (7 centers, 50 isolates), and North America (60 centers, 1,182 isolates). Resistance to amphotericin B, flucytosine, and fluconazoie was <= 1% overall. Susceptibility to flucytosine (MIC, <= 4 mu g/ml) ranged from 35% in North America to 68% in Latin America. Similarly, only 75% of isolates from North America were susceptible to fluconazole (MIC, <= 8 mu g/ml) compared to 94 to 100% in the other regions. Isolates remained highly susceptible to amphotericin B (99% susceptibility at a MIC of <= mu g/ml) over the entire 15-year period. Susceptibility to flucytosine (MIC, <= 4 mu g/ml) increased from 34% in 1990 to 1994 to 66% in 2000 to 2004. Susceptibility to fluconazole (MIC, <= 8 mu g/ml) increased from 72% in 1990 to 1994 to 96% in 2000 to 2004. Voriconazole, posaconazole, and ravuconazole all were very active (99% of isolates susceptible at MIC of <= 1 mu g/ml) against this geographically diverse collection of isolates. We conclude that in vitro resistance to antifungal agents used in the treatment of cryptococcosis remains uncommon among isolates of C. neoformans from five broad geographic regions and has not increased over a 15-year period.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据