ライフサイエンスコーパス: Scedosporium

1 3% versus 69%; Fusarium, 84% versus 42%; and Scedosporium, 94% versus 18%, respectively).

2 ceptibility patterns among members of genera Scedosporium and L. prolificans.

3 f antifungal susceptibility patterns between Scedosporium and L. prolificans.

4 ntifungals is common among members of genera Scedosporium and Lomentospora, with optimal treatments s

5 ecies of Acremonium, Fusarium, Paecilomyces, Scedosporium, and Blastoschizomyces is suggested as a me

6 abase for the identification of Aspergillus, Scedosporium, and Fusarium species (n = 28) by matrix-as

7 portant fungi (CIF), defined as Aspergillus, Scedosporium, and Trichosporon species and Exophiala der

8 The most frequent species were Scedosporium apiospermum (63%) and Scedosporium boydii (

9 osely related fungi Pseudallescheria boydii, Scedosporium apiospermum and S. aurantiacum in the Pseud

10 ium oxysporum, Scedosporium prolificans, and Scedosporium apiospermum hyphae after caspofungin exposu

11 Respiratory tract colonization with Scedosporium apiospermum in patients with chronic suppur

12 olani, and Paecilomyces variotii and for two Scedosporium apiospermum isolates.

13 voriconazole geometric mean (G mean) MFC for Scedosporium apiospermum was lower (2.52 microg/ml) than

14 ith an invasive soft tissue infection due to Scedosporium apiospermum was successfully treated with v

15 iliforme, and F. solani; and two isolates of Scedosporium apiospermum) by the CLSI reference broth mi

16 pergillus terreus, Scedosporium prolificans, Scedosporium apiospermum, Fusarium oxysporum/Fusarium so

17 cies were Scedosporium apiospermum (63%) and Scedosporium boydii (11%), followed by Lomentospora prol

18 losely related fungi in the Pseudallescheria-Scedosporium complex or with a wide range of mould and y

19 m and S. aurantiacum in the Pseudallescheria-Scedosporium complex, is a contributing aetiology to tsu

20 It does not amplify Candida, Scedosporium, Fusarium or Rhizopus species and its clini

21 Unfortunately, Scedosporium infections are generally resistant to ampho

22 n for lung transplantation candidates, since Scedosporium infections occurring posttransplantation ar

23 rgillus, 3 (7%) had Fusarium, and 2 (4%) had Scedosporium infections.

24 ium isolates, 5 Trichosporon isolates, and 5 Scedosporium isolates.

25 nding our respiratory medicine unit have had Scedosporium organisms isolated from sputum samples.

26 nce of direct patient-to-patient spread, and Scedosporium organisms were not isolated from dust, soil

27 wn for Fusarium spp. (2 to >8 microg/ml) and Scedosporium prolificans (>8 microg/ml) by the three age

28 Scedosporium prolificans is a soil saprophyte that is as

29 The dematiaceous (melanized) fungus Scedosporium prolificans is an emerging and frequently f

30 e generally resistant to amphotericin B, and Scedosporium prolificans strains are particularly resist

31 oryzae, Fusarium solani, Fusarium oxysporum, Scedosporium prolificans, and Scedosporium apiospermum h

32 Pseudallescheria boydii, Rhizopus arrhizus, Scedosporium prolificans, and Sporothrix schenckii were

33 vus, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus terreus, Scedosporium prolificans, Scedosporium apiospermum, Fusa

34 ta, Fusarium solani, Paecilomyces lilacinus, Scedosporium prolificans, Trichoderma longibrachiatum, a

35 s lilacinus, Rhizopus sp. (two species), and Scedosporium sp. (two species): (i) two media (supplemen

36 s isolates, 6 Rhizopus arrhizus isolates, 23 Scedosporium sp. isolates, 23 dematiaceous fungi, and 5

37 ng 1 Fusarium species (F. moniliforme) and 2 Scedosporium species (S. apiospermum and S. prolificans)

38 Scedosporium species are increasingly isolated from immu

39 nd clinical spectrum of infections caused by Scedosporium species complex and Lomentospora prolifican

40 f antifungal therapy most effective for each Scedosporium species complex are important determinants

41 omprehensively account for the advent of new Scedosporium species identified by molecular phylogeneti

42 osteomyelitis or septic arthritis caused by Scedosporium species in immunocompetent patients.

43 The prevalences of Aspergillus and Scedosporium species were 40.8% and 5.2%, respectively,

44 species, Mucorales agents, Fusarium species, Scedosporium species, dimorphic fungi, Pneumocystis jiro

45 ies, Mucorales agents, Fusarium species, and Scedosporium species.

46 Mucor, Paecilomyces, Penicillium, Rhizopus, Scedosporium, Sporothrix, or other aspergilli tested.

47 oles, voriconazole showed lower MICs against Scedosporium spp.

48 olorofim showed the lowest MICs against all Scedosporium spp. and L. prolificans, followed by micafu

49 nd terbinafine had higher MIC values against Scedosporium spp. and L. prolificans.

50 ainst A. fumigatus, limited activity against Scedosporium spp., and no activity against zygomycetes o

51 Candida tropicalis), Aspergillus fumigatus, Scedosporium spp., Fusarium spp., and zygomycetes (inclu

52 for Aspergillus species (77.5%), followed by Scedosporium spp./L. prolificans (20.0%), Mucorales agen

53 ies, Mucorales agents, Fusarium species, and Scedosporium spp./Lomentospora prolificans.

54 those with other mold infections (Fusarium, scedosporium, zygomycosis, etc.), those with candidemia,