↓ Skip to main content

Micafungin versus caspofungin in the treatment of Candida glabrata infection: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Micafungin versus caspofungin in the treatment of Candida glabrata infection: a case report
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13256-016-1096-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shoko Merrit Yamada, Yusuke Tomita, Tomotsugu Yamaguchi, Toshiaki Matsuki

Abstract

Micafungin and caspofungin, which are both echinocandins, elicit their antifungal effects by suppressing the synthesis of β-D-glucan, an essential component of fungal cell walls. If micafungin is not effective against a fungal infection, is it unreasonable to switch to caspofungin? An 80-year-old Asian man presented to our hospital with brain and lung abscesses. Klebsiella pneumonia and Escherichia coli were identified by sputa culture and Streptococcus mitis was identified in the brain abscess culture obtained by drainage surgery. He was treated with antibiotics and both abscesses shrank after the treatment. But he continued to have a high fever and Candida glabrata was identified by blood culture. The origin of the infection was not clarified and micafungin was administered intravenously. The fungus showed poor susceptibility to micafungin; we then switched the antifungal from micafungin to caspofungin. After caspofungin treatment, his body temperature remained below 37 °C and his β-D-glucan levels decreased remarkably. In vitro, micafungin is considered more effective against C. glabrata because its minimum inhibitory concentration against C. glabrata is lower than that of caspofungin. However, in vivo, there is no significantly different effect between the two drugs. When micafungin is not effective against candidiasis, a switch to caspofungin might be applicable because the pharmacokinetics in each echinocandin is slightly different.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 21%
Other 1 7%
Researcher 1 7%
Unknown 9 64%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 14%
Environmental Science 1 7%
Psychology 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 57%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2017.
All research outputs
#17,825,154
of 22,899,952 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1,916
of 3,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,585
of 312,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#40
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,899,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,933 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.