ArticleMicroorganisms2025
Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Isavuconazole Versus Amphotericin B for Patients with Invasive Mucormycosis.
Article in Microorganisms, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular Mechanisms of Mucormycosis Pathogenesis: Host-Pathogen Interactions and Immune Evasion.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Myasthenia gravis and community-acquired pneumonia: therapeutic challenges.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInvasive mucormycosis (IM) poses a substantial morbidity and mortality burden among immunocompromised patients.
objectivesWe aim to compare the real-world effectiveness and safety of isavuconazole with those of amphotericin B in patients with IM. PATIENTS AND
methodsIn this observational cohort study, we enrolled patients who were diagnosed with IM and treated with either isavuconazole or amphotericin B.
resultsA total of 106 patients met the study criteria. Of these, 47 received isavuconazole, and 59 received amphotericin B as the primary treatment. The two cohorts had similar baseline characteristics, including a history of malignancy, use of immunosuppressants, infection sites, and pathogens. The amphotericin B group demonstrated a significantly greater incidence of renal disorders (
conclusionsIsavuconazole outperformed amphotericin B as a first-line treatment option for IM in terms of its clinical effectiveness and safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.