<i>Candida rugosa</i> , an Emerging Fungal Pathogen with Resistance to Azoles: Geographic and Temporal Trends from the ARTEMIS DISK Antifungal Surveillance Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Candida rugosa is a fungus that appears to be emerging as a cause of infection in some geographic regions. We utilized the extensive database of the ARTEMIS DISK Antifungal Surveillance Program to describe the geographic and temporal trends in the isolation of C. rugosa from clinical specimens and the in vitro susceptibilities of 452 isolates to fluconazole and voriconazole. C. rugosa accounted for 0.4% of 134,715 isolates of Candida, and the frequency of isolation increased from 0.03% to 0.4% over the 6.5-year study period (1997 to 2003). C. rugosa was most common in the Latin American region (2.7% versus 0.1 to 0.4%). Decreased susceptibility to fluconazole (40.5% susceptible) was observed in all geographic regions; however, isolates from Europe and North America were much more susceptible (97 to 100%) to voriconazole than those from other geographic regions (55.8 to 58.8%). C. rugosa was most often isolated from blood and urine in patients hospitalized at the Medical and Surgical inpatient services. Notably, bloodstream isolates were the least susceptible to both fluconazole and voriconazole. C. rugosa should be considered, along with the established pathogens Candida krusei and Candida glabrata, as a species of Candida with reduced susceptibility to the azole antifungal agents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".