Antifungal Activities of Posaconazole, Ravuconazole, and Voriconazole Compared to Those of Itraconazole and Amphotericin B against 239 Clinical Isolates of <i>Aspergillus</i> spp. and Other Filamentous Fungi: Report from SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Posaconazole, ravuconazole, and voriconazole are new triazole derivatives that possess potent, broad-spectrum antifungal activity. We evaluated the in vitro activity of these investigational triazoles compared with that of itraconazole and amphotericin B against 239 clinical isolates of filamentous fungi from the SENTRY Program, including Aspergillus spp. (198 isolates), Fusarium spp. (7 isolates), Penicillium spp. (19 isolates), Rhizopus spp. (4 isolates), Mucor spp. (2 isolates), and miscellaneous species (9 isolates). The isolates were obtained from 16 different medical centers in the United States and Canada between January and December 2000. In vitro susceptibility testing was performed using the microdilution broth method outlined in the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M38-P document. Overall, posaconazole was the most active compound, inhibiting 94% of isolates at a MIC of < or = 1 microg/ml, followed by voriconazole (91%), amphotericin B (89%), ravuconazole (88%), and itraconazole (70%). All three new triazoles demonstrated excellent activity (MIC, < or = 1 microg/ml) against Aspergillus spp. (114 Aspergillus fumigatus, 22 Aspergillus niger, 13 Aspergillus flavus, 9 Aspergillus versicolor, 8 Aspergillus terreus, and 32 Aspergillus spp.): posaconazole (98%), voriconazole (98%), ravuconazole (92%), amphotericin B (89%), and itraconazole (72%). None of the triazoles were active against Fusarium spp. (MIC at which 50% of the isolates tested were inhibited [MIC(50)], >8 microg/ml) or Mucor spp. (MIC(50), >8 microg/ml). Posaconazole and ravuconazole were more active than voriconazole against Rhizopus spp. (MIC(50), 1 to 2 microg/ml versus >8 microg/ml, respectively). Based on these results, all three new triazoles exhibited promising activity against Aspergillus spp. and other less commonly encountered isolates of filamentous fungi. The clinical value of these in vitro data remains to be seen, and in vitro-in vivo correlation is needed for both new and established antifungal agents. Surveillance efforts should be expanded in order to monitor the spectrum of filamentous fungal pathogens and their in vitro susceptibility as these new antifungal agents are introduced into clinical use.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".