Species Diversity and Antifungal Susceptibilities of Oral Yeasts from Patients with Head and Neck Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the colonization and susceptibility to antifungal drugs of oral yeasts in head and neck cancer patients in Hainan, China. Methods: Oral mucosa samples from 211 head and neck cancer patients were collected. Oral yeasts were isolated and identified to species by rDNA ITS sequencing. The susceptibilities of all yeasts to amphotericin B, fluconazole, fluorocytosine, itraconazole, and ketoconazole were determined. Results: Yeasts were isolated from 124 of the 211 oral swabs. The 124 yeast isolates were classified into following 10 species, from the most frequent to the least frequent, Candida albicans (53.2%), Candida tropicalis (22.6%), Candida krusei (6.5%), Kodamaea ohmeri (5.6%), Candida parapsilosis (4.8%), Hanseniaspora opuntiae (2.4%), Candida metapsilosis (1.6%), Pichia terricola (1.6%), Pichia norvegensis (0.8%), and Trichosporon asahii (0.8%). The overall frequencies of resistance among the yeasts to amphotericin B, fluconazole, flucytosine, itraconazole, and ketoconazole were 4.8%, 8.1%, 16.1%, 9.7%, and 9.7%, respectively. One C. albicans strain and one C. tropicalis strain were tolerant/resistant to all five drugs. Conclusion: Given the high prevalence of oral yeast colonization in head and neck cancer patients and the observed resistance of certain yeast isolates to the five antifungal drugs, our results suggest that rapid identification and susceptibility testing should be implemented before antifungal treatment is applied among patients with head and neck cancer in Hainan. Keywords: head and neck cancer, oral yeast, Candida , antifungal resistance
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".