Trial reportOpen forum infectious diseases2025
Rezafungin Versus Caspofungin for the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: Results from the Double-blind, Randomized, Phase 3 ReSTORE Trial Including the China Extension Study.
Trial report in Open forum infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03667690 (A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Rezafungin for Injection vs. Intravenous Caspofungin Followed by Oral Fluconazole Step Down in the Treatment of Subjects With Candidemia and/or Invasive Candidiasis), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Rezafungin for Injection vs. Intravenous Caspofungin Followed by Oral Fluconazole Step Down in the Treatment of Subjects With Candidemia and/or Invasive Candidiasis
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Trial
- The Four Critical Priority Fungi According to the World Health Organization and the Hope for New Therapies: A Focus on Cell Wall Antifungal Targets.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Diagnosis and treatment of invasive fungal disease in children with hematological malignancies after chemotherapy: Challenges and strategies (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rezafungin is approved for use in adults with candidemia and/or invasive candidiasis (IC) based on data from the ReSTORE trial (NCT03667690), which demonstrated noninferior efficacy to caspofungin. For regulatory purposes, an additional cohort of patients from China was recruited to ReSTORE. Here, we compared rezafungin and caspofungin in patients with candidemia and/or IC through analysis of the ReSTORE global data plus the China extension study. Methods: Adults with candidemia/IC were randomized (1:1) to receive weekly rezafungin (400/200 mg) or daily caspofungin (70/50 mg) for ≤28 days. Noninferiority was concluded for primary efficacy endpoints if the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval (CI) was below 20% for Day 30 all-cause mortality and if the weighted lower bound was above -20% for Day 14 global cure. Additional efficacy outcomes and safety were evaluated. Results: Overall, 246 patients were randomized (122 rezafungin and 124 caspofungin). Noninferiority was demonstrated for both primary endpoints. Day 30 all-cause mortality was 25.2% and 24.8% (treatment difference 0.4%; 95% CI -10.8, 11.6) and Day 14 global cure was 56.5% and 57.3% (weighted treatment difference -1.0%; 95% CI -13.5, 11.6) with rezafungin versus caspofungin, respectively. Day 5 mycological eradication was numerically higher (68.7% vs 63.2%) and time to negative blood culture was numerically shorter (median 26.5 vs 38.8 h). Safety was comparable between groups; 53.3% (64/120; rezafungin) and 53.7% (66/123; caspofungin) of patients experienced serious adverse events. Conclusions: This analysis confirmed the overall efficacy and safety of rezafungin demonstrated in ReSTORE, with early efficacy related to front-loaded exposure.
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.