2019/12/19 by John P Bomkamp, John P. Bomkamp, Rand Sulaiman +9 · 19 citations
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology · Medicine · #Antifungal resistance and susceptibility #Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing #Biology #Center (category theory) #Fungal Infections and Studies #Identification (biology) #Internal medicine #Medicine #Retrospective cohort study
paper · open access · doi:10.1128/jcm.01408-19
published in Journal of Clinical Microbiology 58(3) (American Society for Microbiology)
openalex publication_date 2019/12/19 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
species isolated from culture or detected on the panel, source of infection, days of therapy (DOT) of antifungals in patients with discordant results, and overall antifungal DOT/1,000 patient days. A total of 433 paired T2Candida panel and myco/f lytic blood cultures were identified. The pretest likelihood of candidemia was 4.4%. The sensitivity and specificity were 64.7% and 95.6%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 40.7% and 98.5%, respectively. There were 16 patients with T2Candida panel positive and myco/f lytic blood culture negative results, while 6 patients had T2Candida panel negative and myco/f blood culture positive results. The overall antifungal DOT/1,000 patient days was improved after implementation of the T2Candida panel; however, the use of micafungin continued to decline after the panel was removed. We found that the T2Candida panel is a highly specific diagnostic tool; however, the sensitivity and positive predictive value may be lower than previously reported when employed in clinical practice. Clinicians should use this panel as an adjunct to blood cultures when making a definitive diagnosis of candidemia.