ライフサイエンスコーパス: caspofungin

1 pression response to cell wall inhibition by caspofungin.

2 iclofenac showed increased susceptibility to caspofungin.

3 1 and of Sko1-dependent genes in response to caspofungin.

4 uses hypersensitivity to the fungicidal drug caspofungin.

5 ved amphotericin B, and from 0 that received caspofungin.

6 bloodstream isolates of C. guilliermondii to caspofungin.

7 associated amphotericin B, voriconazole, and caspofungin.

8 s were studied with either amphotericin B or caspofungin.

9 ced in vitro and in vivo susceptibilities to caspofungin.

10 omplete inhibition of growth) for the MIC of caspofungin.

11 y to voriconazole, and low susceptibility to caspofungin.

12 ates of known high and low susceptibility to caspofungin.

13 atistical criteria for the noninferiority of caspofungin.

14 al dialysis and the first to be treated with caspofungin.

15 95%), which were particularly susceptible to caspofungin.

16 lay enhanced sensitivity to nikkomycin Z and caspofungin.

17 trated with NSC319726 and azoles, as well as caspofungin.

18 zole antifungals, but had elevated MICs with caspofungin.

19 at high doses of echinocandins, most usually caspofungin.

20 herefore optimize the antifungal activity of caspofungin.

21 he blind and receive preemptive therapy with caspofungin.

22 susceptibility and resistance of Candida to caspofungin.

23 gate marker to predict S and R of Candida to caspofungin.

24 ICs was strongest for fluconazole (0.94) and caspofungin (0.88).

25 0.5/2 (88.3%); anidulafungin, 0.5/2 (97.4%); caspofungin, 0.12/0.5 (98.0%); and micafungin, 0.25/1 (9

26 g/ml of anidulafungin (621 isolates tested), caspofungin (1,447 isolates tested), and micafungin (539

27 ntraperitoneally [i.p.] once a day [QD]), or caspofungin (2 mg/kg i.p. QD), and samples were collecte

28 nsisted of monotherapy of fluconazole (60%), caspofungin (24%), voriconazole (8%), or liposomal ampho

29 8 isolates), amphotericin (29 isolates), and caspofungin (29 isolates).

30 go detectable phosphorylation in response to caspofungin; 3) SKO1 transcript levels are induced by ca

31 254 isolates), anidulafungin (121 isolates), caspofungin (300 isolates), and micafungin (102 isolates

32 Preincubation with caspofungin (32 microg/mL for R. oryzae; 0.0625 microg/m

33 icrog disk (for all except zygomycetes), BBL caspofungin 5-microg disk, and amphotericin B 10-microg

34 azole 1- and 10-microg disks, two sources of caspofungin 5-microg disks [BBL and Oxoid], and posacona

35 eptibility was determined for anidulafungin, caspofungin, 5-flucytosine, fluconazole, itraconazole, p

36 wed by 40 mg daily thereafter, along with IV caspofungin (50 mg/d) and liposomal amphotericin B (300

37 ta and caspofungin (85.3%) and C. krusei and caspofungin (54.5%).

38 s, followed by 200 mg IV once-daily [OD]) or caspofungin (70 mg IV OD on day 1, followed by 50 mg IV

39 arisons, with the exception of C. krusei and caspofungin (81.8%).

40 sults with the exceptions of C. glabrata and caspofungin (85.3%) and C. krusei and caspofungin (54.5%

41 en the Vitek 2 system and BMD were 99.8% for caspofungin, 98.2% for micafungin, and 98.1% for posacon

42 nikkomycin Z (a chitin synthase inhibitor), caspofungin (a beta-1,3-glucan synthase inhibitor), or F

43 ng was detected after mice were treated with caspofungin, a beta-1,3-glucan synthase inhibitor that i

44 Caspofungin, a member of the new echinocandin class of c

45 ent does not describe guidelines for testing caspofungin acetate (MK-0991) and other echinocandins ag

46 ubjects (five for each of the five different caspofungin acetate concentrations).

47 zole, and voriconazole) and the echinocandin caspofungin acetate for 100 isolates of Candida spp.

48 Efficacy of caspofungin acetate in a patient with life-threatening C

49 Caspofungin acetate was injected intravitreally in the l

50 ly functionalized antifungal agent CANCIDAS (caspofungin acetate, 2) is described, starting from the

51 Caspofungin acetate, a new antifungal agent with minimal

52 osinophil-mediated mechanism for paradoxical caspofungin activity and support the future investigatio

53 There was no significant change in caspofungin activity over the 4-year study period.

54 We determined the MICs of micafungin and caspofungin against 315 invasive clinical (bloodstream a

55 We determined the in vitro activity of caspofungin against 8,197 invasive (bloodstream or steri

56 procedure at present for in vitro testing of caspofungin against Aspergillus spp.

57 nation of MICs (FMICs) of amphotericin B and caspofungin against Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp.

58 determination of MICs of amphotericin B and caspofungin against Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. th

59 cineurin inhibitor FK506 in combination with caspofungin against echinocandin resistant C. lusitaniae

60 506 has synergistic fungicidal activity with caspofungin against echinocandin resistant isolates.

61 agar media that contain serial dilutions of caspofungin (agar dilution).

62 Perturbation with the cell wall inhibitor caspofungin also has distinct gene expression impact in

63 restingly, treatment of wild-type cells with caspofungin also increased MBL binding to C. neoformans.

64 ance for emergence of in vitro resistance to caspofungin among invasive Candida spp. isolates is indi

65 Fluconazole, caspofungin, amphotericin B, or lipid formulation of amp

66 in both untreated mice and mice treated with caspofungin, an antifungal drug that inhibits beta-1,3-g

67 on factor mutants that are hypersensitive to caspofungin, an inhibitor of beta-1,3-glucan synthase.

68 f Pneumocystis pneumonia that treatment with caspofungin, an inhibitor of beta-1,3-glucan synthesis,

69 ical cutoff values (ECVs) of 0.12 mug/ml for caspofungin and 0.03 mug/ml for micafungin to differenti

70 the Neo-Sensitabs assay for testing 5-microg caspofungin and 1-microg voriconazole posaconazole table

71 overall success rates were 33.9 percent for caspofungin and 33.7 percent for liposomal amphotericin

72 as evaluated in 1095 patients (556 receiving caspofungin and 539 receiving liposomal amphotericin B).

73 hypersensitivity to the cell wall inhibitor caspofungin and a shallow cell wall structure.

74 p90 promoter resulted in hypersensitivity to caspofungin and abolition of the paradoxical effect (res

75 Colorimetric MICs of caspofungin and amphotericin B corresponded to the first

76 Caspofungin and amphotericin B inhibited 93% and 89% of

77 ed essentially normal responses to the drugs caspofungin and amphotericin.

78 l cutoff value (ECV) of 0.12 mug/ml for both caspofungin and anidulafungin to differentiate wild-type

79 r intermediate [I] or resistant [R]) to both caspofungin and anidulafungin, 52 (83.8%) contained a mu

80 in or with preexposure to the combination of caspofungin and anti-beta-glucan monoclonal antibody, us

81 solates, from 0.5% (2001) to 3.1% (2009) for caspofungin and C. parapsilosis, from 0.4% (2004) to 1.8

82 lates to the combination of voriconazole and caspofungin and clinical outcome.

83 s oryzae to itraconazole, amphotericin B, or caspofungin and exposure of Aspergillus fumigatus to vor

84 ere established after 24 h of incubation for caspofungin and micafungin and after 48 h of incubation

85 The Vitek 2 system reliably determined caspofungin and micafungin MICs among Candida spp. and p

86 EAs) between the Vitek 2 and BMD methods for caspofungin and micafungin were 99.5% and 98.6%, respect

87 e (either intermediate or resistant) to both caspofungin and micafungin, 54 (90.0%) contained a mutat

88 isolates of Candida spp. were tested against caspofungin and micafungin.

89 sensitive to the cell wall-active antifungal caspofungin and other cell wall stress inducers, and its

90 We investigated whether caspofungin and other echinocandins have immune-enhancin

91 The addition of caspofungin and voriconazole decreased growth of Candida

92 in response to ketoconazole, amphotericin B, caspofungin, and 5-fluorocytosine (5-FC), respectively.

93 of 3 commonly used antifungals: fluconazole, caspofungin, and amphotericin B.

94 hree FDA-approved echinocandins (micafungin, caspofungin, and anidulafungin).

95 Voriconazole, caspofungin, and combination antifungals were less cost-

96 toplasty (PK); amphotericin B, voriconazole, caspofungin, and combination therapy; and third-party pa

97 ed the in vitro activities of anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin against 5,346 invasive (bloo

98 ed the in vitro activities of anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin against 526 isolates of Aspe

99 erpretive MIC breakpoints for anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin against Candida species.

100 posaconazole, amphotericin B, anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin against invasive, unique pat

101 (CLSI) BMD method M27-A3 for anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin susceptibility testing of 13

102 The CLSI-developed ECVs for anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin were applied to 15,269 isola

103 amphotericin B, voriconazole, posaconazole, caspofungin, and micafungin were assessed for 290 clinic

104 to fluconazole, voriconazole, anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin were determined by CLSI brot

105 ICs to FLC and echinocandins (anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin) and FKS1 and FKS2 gene sequ

106 ited by < or = 2 microg/ml of anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin, respectively) were as follo

107 non-WT isolates per year for anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin, respectively, were as follo

108 is shown in parentheses) for anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin, respectively, were as follo

109 %, and 8.0% were resistant to anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin, respectively.

110 f Candida sp. strains against anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin, using CLSI M27-A3 broth mic

111 or fluconazole, voriconazole, anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin, while a provisional suscept

112 o voriconazole, posaconazole, anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin.

113 silosis to the echinocandins, anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin.

114 ida spp. to the echinocandins anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin.

115 lates of Candida spp. against anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin.

116 nem, piperacillin, liposomal amphotericin B, caspofungin, and voriconazole).

117 B, fluconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole, caspofungin, anidulafungin, and micafungin) and interpre

118 azole resistant, and all were susceptible to caspofungin, anidulafungin, and micafungin.

119 Interpretive disk diffusion breakpoints for caspofungin are proposed by evaluating 762 isolates of C

120 candin drugs (micafungin, anidulafungin, and caspofungin) are the preferred choice to treat a range o

121 ts in the isavuconazole arm and 71.1% in the caspofungin arm (adjusted difference -10.8, 95% confiden

122 onazole (isavuconazole arm) or voriconazole (caspofungin arm).

123 able invasive candidiasis in the placebo and caspofungin arms was 16.7% (14/84) and 9.8% (10/102), re

124 d, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of caspofungin as antifungal prophylaxis in 222 adults who

125 rial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of caspofungin as compared with liposomal amphotericin B as

126 on for amphotericin B and 50% inhibition for caspofungin as measured by a fluorescent signal.

127 nd recommend amphotericin B, fluconazole, or caspofungin as the primary therapeutic option.

128 Etest identified all 7 mutant strains using caspofungin as the reagent.

129 Mice injected with caspofungin at vitreal concentrations from 0.41 to 4.1 m

130 ested were susceptible to amphotericin B and caspofungin, but 11% were resistant or dose-dependently

131 ole (V), posaconazole (P), flucytosine (FC), caspofungin (C), and amphotericin B (A) were tested with

132 ceptibility testing for the antifungal agent caspofungin can be performed using flow cytometry (FC).

133 ata exists regarding the pharmacodynamics of caspofungin (CAS) during invasive pulmonary aspergillosi

134 ety and efficacy of RZF once weekly (QWk) to caspofungin (CAS) once daily for treatment of candidemia

135 10 different species obtained as part of the caspofungin clinical trials.

136 ith acute myeloid leukemia, prophylaxis with caspofungin compared with fluconazole resulted in signif

137 ncentration end point, defined as the lowest caspofungin concentration yielding conspicuously aberran

138 f the paradoxical effect (resistance at high caspofungin concentrations).

139 s that were treated with both diclofenac and caspofungin contained significantly fewer biofilm cells

140 now commonly treated with the echinocandins caspofungin (CSF) or micafungin (MCF).

141 ecies-specific ECVs for anidulafungin (ANF), caspofungin (CSF), micafungin (MCF), fluconazole (FLC),

142 lates at <or=1 microg/ml, respectively, with caspofungin demonstrating an MEC 90 of 0.12 microg/ml.

143 systemic administration of voriconazole and caspofungin despite poor in vitro activity of voriconazo

144 to the zone diameters observed with 5-microg caspofungin disks produced by two different disk manufac

145 nt who should have received a higher dose of caspofungin due to his obesity.

146 to predict the susceptibility of Candida to caspofungin due to unacceptably high interlaboratory var

147 Overall, the agreement between caspofungin Etest MICs and broth dilution values was hig

148 However, caspofungin exhibited potent in vitro activity at therap

149 n ergosterol biosynthesis and sterol uptake; caspofungin exposure affected genes involved in cell wal

150 PMN-induced damage increased after caspofungin exposure and was further augmented by the ad

151 s, and Scedosporium apiospermum hyphae after caspofungin exposure.

152 d Cryptococcus neoformans to amphotericin B, caspofungin, fluconazole, itraconazole, and voriconazole

153 Isavuconazole was compared to caspofungin followed by oral voriconazole in a Phase 3,

154 aconazole, posaconazole, amphotericin B, and caspofungin for 383 invasive Candida sp. isolates from S

155 sted were inhibited (MIC50) and the MIC90 of caspofungin for all eight Candida species were within 1

156 on, with the MICs against amphotericin B and caspofungin for all species.

157 0%) with the MICs of both amphotericin B and caspofungin for all species.

158 potential use of calcineurin inhibitors and caspofungin for emerging drug-resistant C. lusitaniae in

159 onstrate non-inferiority of isavuconazole to caspofungin for primary treatment of invasive candidiasi

160 from patients treated with an echinocandin (caspofungin) for which the MICs were > 2 microg/ml (two

161 The first of the class to be licensed was caspofungin, for refractory invasive aspergillosis (abou

162 owth of C. glabrata and C. tropicalis, while caspofungin generally favored significant growth of all

163 seven days after therapy was greater in the caspofungin group (92.6 percent vs. 89.2 percent, P=0.05

164 y discontinuation occurred less often in the caspofungin group than in the amphotericin B group (10.3

165 disease was 3.1% (95% CI, 1.3%-7.0%) in the caspofungin group vs 7.2% (95% CI, 4.4%-11.8%) in the fl

166 s, a higher proportion of those treated with caspofungin had a successful outcome (51.9 percent vs. 2

167 Amphotericin B and caspofungin had minimal circuit clearance and did not ch

168 Caspofungin has excellent in vitro activity against inva

169 1 regulators were identified from a panel of caspofungin-hypersensitive protein kinase-defective muta

170 Caspofungin hypersusceptibility requires the master regu

171 MIC testing with caspofungin identified all mutant strains.

172 s determined after intravitreal injection of caspofungin in a mouse model to assess its safety profil

173 tes, ranging from 2.1% isolates resistant to caspofungin in Baltimore to 3.1% isolates resistant to a

174 in; 3) SKO1 transcript levels are induced by caspofungin in both wild-type and hog1 mutant strains; a

175 Results of studies of caspofungin in candidaemia and invasive candidiasis sugg

176 be one factor that leads to falsely elevated caspofungin in vitro susceptibility results and that thi

177 onazole, three with micafungin, and one with caspofungin) including 2,792 patients were identified.

178 of A. fumigatus, but not S. prolificans, to caspofungin induced expression of Dectin-1 by PMN.

179 Caspofungin-induced unmasking caused approximately fourf

180 Unexpectedly, caspofungin induces many of the same genes that are repr

181 sko1 mutants are defective in expression of caspofungin-inducible genes that are not induced by osmo

182 All three new triazoles and caspofungin inhibited >95% of Aspergillus spp. at <or=1

183 The echinocandin antifungal caspofungin inhibits synthesis of cell wall beta-1,3-glu

184 Caspofungin is a safe antifungal agent at vitreal concen

185 Caspofungin is a synthetic echinocandin antifungal agent

186 Caspofungin is as effective as and generally better tole

187 Caspofungin is being used increasingly as therapy for in

188 183 filamentous isolates to amphotericin B, caspofungin, itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazol

189 ntifungals posaconazole, amphotericin B, and caspofungin, likely through increasing antifungal penetr

190 The findings suggest that caspofungin may be considered for prophylaxis against in

191 Caspofungin may be useful in the treatment of C. albican

192 ], 0.007 microg/ml; MEC90, 0.015 microg/ml), caspofungin (MEC50, 0.015 microg/ml; MEC90, 0.03 microg/

193 Caspofungin MIC values and species-specific interpretive

194 east isolates (all Candida glabrata) showing caspofungin MIC values of >or=0.5 microg/ml were further

195 Caspofungin MIC values were compared with those of anidu

196 acceptably high interlaboratory variation in caspofungin MIC values, we evaluated the use of micafung

197 acceptably high interlaboratory variation of caspofungin MIC values.

198 In general, caspofungin MIC-2 and MEC pairs were comparable with bot

199 Caspofungin (MIC at which 90% of isolates tested are sus

200 are inhibited [MIC(50)], >128 microg/ml) and caspofungin (MIC(50), >8 microg/ml).

201 resistant to fluconazole were susceptible to caspofungin (MIC(90), 0.06 microg/ml) and flucytosine (M

202 ml), micafungin (MIC(90), 0.12 microg/ml) or caspofungin (MIC(90), 0.25 microg/ml).

203 (MIC50, 0.06 microg/ml; MIC90, 2 microg/ml), caspofungin (MIC50, 0.03 microg/ml; MIC90, 0.25 microg/m

204 MIC of < or =2 microg/ml) and comparable to caspofungin (MIC50/MIC90, 0.03/0.25 mug/ml; 99% inhibite

205 t ranged from 99.3% (anidulafungin) to 100% (caspofungin, micafungin) and interlaboratory reproducibi

206 Echinocandins (caspofungin, micafungin, and anidulafungin) exert their

207 gs that showed the most potent activity were caspofungin, micafungin, and terbinafine, while amphoter

208 , posaconazole, voriconazole, anidulafungin, caspofungin, micafungin, and terbinafine.

209 MICs of the comparator drugs amphotericin B, caspofungin, micafungin, and voriconazole were also dete

210 formed against 7 antifungals (anidulafungin, caspofungin, micafungin, fluconazole, itraconazole, posa

211 tudy of interlaboratory reproducibility with caspofungin microdilution susceptibility testing against

212 for C. krusei isolates, as all isolates had caspofungin MICs above the threshold for resistance meas

213 All C. glabrata isolates had caspofungin MICs of >/=0.5 mug/ml, the clinical breakpoi

214 Of the 25 isolates with caspofungin MICs of >1 microg/ml, 12 isolates were C. pa

215 n MICs of >2 microg/ml, but all demonstrated caspofungin MICs of >2 microg/ml.

216 sis isolates had wild-type FKS sequences and caspofungin MICs of 0.5 to 1 microg/ml, but 4/5 had mica

217 us untreated polystyrene microtiter trays on caspofungin MICs using 209 isolates of four Candida spec

218 Strains for which anidulafungin and caspofungin MICs were >/=0.5 mug/ml and for which micafu

219 Among the 11 isolates for which caspofungin MICs were >/=2 microg/ml, eight were account

220 Caspofungin MICs were also determined using the commerci

221 d from resistant/non-wild-type isolates when caspofungin MICs were measured using untreated polystyre

222 identified as susceptible or resistant when caspofungin MICs were measured with treated or untreated

223 us, A. nidulans, A. niger, and A. terreus to caspofungin (MICs and minimum effective concentrations [

224 ONCLUSIONS.: Combination of voriconazole and caspofungin might be considered preferable therapy for s

225 isolates of C. guilliermondii tested against caspofungin, most were inhibited by < or =2 microg/ml (9

226 luded monotherapy with fluconazole (n = 39), caspofungin (n = 16), and a polyene-based product (n = 1

227 first chemotherapy cycle to prophylaxis with caspofungin (n = 257) or fluconazole (n = 260).

228 ant recipients who received voriconazole and caspofungin (n=40) as primary therapy for invasive asper

229 osaconazole, ravuconazole, voriconazole, and caspofungin of 601 invasive isolates of Candida glabrata

230 ICs or minimum effective concentrations (for caspofungin only), and the categorical agreement were si

231 With caspofungin or anidulafungin administration into the hea

232 a significant survival benefit compared with caspofungin or anti-PD-1 therapy alone, indicating a syn

233 catheters retrieved from rats receiving only caspofungin or diclofenac.

234 posaconazole exhibits in vitro synergy with caspofungin or FK506 against drug susceptible or resista

235 With either caspofungin or micafungin as the test reagent, the CLSI

236 with the beta-1,3 glucan synthase inhibitor caspofungin or the calcineurin inhibitor FK506 against t

237 age occurring with or without preexposure to caspofungin or with preexposure to the combination of ca

238 abrata that were resistant to anidulafungin, caspofungin, or micafungin were shown to have fks mutati

239 Caspofungin- or micafungin-treated conidia and germlings

240 ol and amphotericin (P<.001) and control and caspofungin (P<.001) arms.

241 We examined the in vitro activity of caspofungin, posaconazole, voriconazole, ravuconazole, i

242 e (fluconazole, liposomal amphotericin B, or caspofungin) posttransplant.

243 er 2010 to October 2012 (Period 2), targeted caspofungin prophylaxis was administered to all recipien

244 en Aspergillus fumigatus are associated with caspofungin prophylaxis.

245 ifungal susceptibility of Candida species to caspofungin provided results equivalent to those obtaine

246 At the vitreal concentration of 41 muM, caspofungin reduced the amplitudes of the a-waves, b-wav

247 surveillance reveals no evidence of emerging caspofungin resistance among invasive clinical isolates

248 f >/=0.5 mug/ml, the clinical breakpoint for caspofungin resistance in this species, measured using t

249 ngicidal against blastospores of fluconazole/caspofungin resistant C. albicans strains, and was activ

250 rmore, combined treatment with anti-PD-1 and caspofungin resulted in a significant survival benefit c

251 from wild type, but testing C. glabrata with caspofungin should be approached cautiously.

252 ntifungal agents, including voriconazole and caspofungin, show promise in the treatment of potentiall

253 atory variability is observed in testing the caspofungin susceptibility of Candida species by both th

254 Fewer patients who received caspofungin sustained a nephrotoxic effect (2.6 percent

255 roducibility of MIC data was problematic for caspofungin tests with Aspergillus spp. under all condit

256 y variability was seen in the results of the caspofungin tests.

257 e 1) sko1 mutants are much more sensitive to caspofungin than hog1 mutants; 2) Sko1 does not undergo

258 al surface chitin in A. fumigatus induced by caspofungin that was associated with airway eosinophil r

259 For amphotericin B and caspofungin, the FMIC end point was the lowest concentra

260 ted experience with combination triazole and caspofungin therapy has been very limited; however, the

261 For higher resistance levels, empirical caspofungin therapy is preferred.

262 For prevalences exceeding 60%, empirical caspofungin therapy is reasonable.

263 Empirical caspofungin therapy is the most effective strategy but i

264 ant patients diagnosed with IA that received caspofungin therapy when compared with azole-treated pat

265 rgillata infection while on posaconazole and caspofungin therapy.

266 enter C patient who responded to then failed caspofungin therapy.

267 population with concurrent voriconazole and caspofungin therapy.

268 For caspofungin to be reasonable at a prevalence of 10%, its

269 cells were treated with a sublethal dose of caspofungin to increase surface 1,3-beta-glucan exposure

270 could be useful in combination therapy with caspofungin to treat C. albicans biofilm-associated infe

271 he Etest and CLSI results ranged from 90.2% (caspofungin) to 93.2% (anidulafungin).

272 e EUCAST and CLSI results ranged from 89.5% (caspofungin) to 99.2% (micafungin), whereas the EA betwe

273 Caspofungin-treated C. albicans was fully able to suppre

274 itment and inhibition of fungal clearance in caspofungin-treated mice with IA required RAG1 expressio

275 More importantly, caspofungin treatment of mice with IA resulted in a patt

276 or to receive amphotericin B deoxycholate or caspofungin treatment while undergoing systemic and intr

277 Nanoscopic imaging of caspofungin-unmasked C. albicans cell walls revealed tha

278 s and resulted in a significant reduction of caspofungin usage, with an overall cost savings of 1,729

279 11; P < .001), and prior voriconazole and/or caspofungin use (OR, 4.41; P = .033) were associated wit

280 redict the susceptibility of Candida spp. to caspofungin using reference methods and species-specific

281 ts treated with combination voriconazole and caspofungin (V/C) salvage therapy for refractory coccidi

282 most common toxicities were hypokalemia (22 caspofungin vs 13 fluconazole), respiratory failure (6 c

283 r probable invasive fungal disease events (6 caspofungin vs 17 fluconazole) included 14 molds, 7 yeas

284 ergillosis was 0.5% (95% CI, 0.1%-3.5%) with caspofungin vs 3.1% (95% CI, 1.4%-6.9%) with fluconazole

285 ences in empirical antifungal therapy (71.9% caspofungin vs 69.5% fluconazole, overall P = .78 by log

286 rank test) or 2-year overall survival (68.8% caspofungin vs 70.8% fluconazole, overall P = .66 by log

287 azole), and elevated alanine transaminase (4 caspofungin vs 8 fluconazole).

288 n vs 13 fluconazole), respiratory failure (6 caspofungin vs 9 fluconazole), and elevated alanine tran

289 For Candida spp., the MIC for caspofungin was defined as the concentration at which th

290 iables on in vitro susceptibility testing of caspofungin was examined with 694 isolates of Candida al

291 of this method, susceptibility testing using caspofungin was performed using 73 isolates of eight dif

292 Caspofungin was safe and tended to reduce the incidence

293 d as a membrane-active antifungal agent, and caspofungin was selected as a cell wall-active agent.

294 Caspofungin was tested in parallel against all isolates.

295 The MIC for caspofungin was the lowest concentration of drug that di

296 Overall, caspofungin was very active against Candida (MIC50/MIC90

297 us isolates with decreased susceptibility to caspofungin were identified.

298 their correlation with either MICs or MECs (caspofungin) were superior on MH agar (91 to 100% versus

299 icacy of the combination of voriconazole and caspofungin when used as primary therapy for invasive as

300 nd after treatment with the antimycotic drug caspofungin, which alters glucan exposure.

301 vitro susceptibilities to amphotericin B and caspofungin, which correlated with clinical failure of t