MétaCan
← all works

Comparison of Caspofungin and Amphotericin B for Invasive Candidiasis

2002· article· en· 1,383 citations· W2003661565 on OpenAlex· 10.1056/nejmoa021585

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread
0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Caspofungin is an echinocandin agent with fungicidal activity against candida species. We performed a double-blind trial to compare caspofungin with amphotericin B deoxycholate for the primary treatment of invasive candidiasis. METHODS: We enrolled patients who had clinical evidence of infection and a positive culture for candida species from blood or another site. Patients were stratified according to the severity of disease, as indicated by the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score, and the presence or absence of neutropenia and were randomly assigned to receive either caspofungin or amphotericin B. The study was designed to compare the efficacy of caspofungin with that of amphotericin B in patients with invasive candidiasis and in a subgroup with candidemia. RESULTS: Of the 239 patients enrolled, 224 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Base-line characteristics, including the percentage of patients with neutropenia and the mean APACHE II score, were similar in the two treatment groups. A modified intention-to-treat analysis showed that the efficacy of caspofungin was similar to that of amphotericin B, with successful outcomes in 73.4 percent of the patients treated with caspofungin and in 61.7 percent of those treated with amphotericin B (difference after adjustment for APACHE II score and neutropenic status, 12.7 percentage points; 95.6 percent confidence interval, -0.7 to 26.0). An analysis of patients who met prespecified criteria for evaluation showed that caspofungin was superior, with a favorable response in 80.7 percent of patients, as compared with 64.9 percent of those who received amphotericin B (difference, 15.4 percentage points; 95.6 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 29.7). Caspofungin was as effective as amphotericin B in patients who had candidemia, with a favorable response in 71.7 percent and 62.8 percent of patients, respectively (difference, 10.0 percentage points; 95.0 percent confidence interval, -4.5 to 24.5). There were significantly fewer drug-related adverse events in the caspofungin group than in the amphotericin B group. CONCLUSIONS: Caspofungin is at least as effective as amphotericin B for the treatment of invasive candidiasis and, more specifically, candidemia.

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.

The record

Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Topic
Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
Field
Medicine
Canadian institutions
McMaster University
Funders
Keywords
CaspofunginNeutropeniaAmphotericin BMedicineInternal medicineConfidence intervalMycosisEchinocandinGastroenterologySurgeryAntifungalChemotherapyFluconazoleDermatology
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes