The Great, The Not So Good And also GSK126

Of the three markers tested, the sensitivity of MN detection in serum samples was lowest (59%). Several other studies have also reported lower sensitivity (50�C60%) of this diagnostic marker [1,18,20�C22]. As serum samples in our study were collected within 12�C24?h of blood culture positivity, our data, together with previous reports, reflect the inherent insensitivity of MN detection for the diagnosis of candidaemia. The combined detection of MN and anti-MN antibodies has, however, been shown to improve sensitivity and specificity [1,2,18]. Nonetheless, significant inter-species variations in the sensitivity of the MN assay have been reported, being highest for infections caused by C.?albicans, followed by C.?glabrata and C.?tropicalis [1]. Likewise, considerable inter-species Transducin differences Selleck GSK126 have also been reported between Candida spp. for the BDG assay [5]. In contrast, in the present study, MN as well as BDG levels in serum samples of patients yielding different Candida spp. in blood cultures were not significantly different (Table?2). Detection of at least two markers is preferred for the diagnosis of candidaemia as it helps to minimize the possibility of false-positive results by either test [1,22]. In this regard, our data show that combined detection of BDG and DNA has comparatively higher sensitivity than detection of BDG and MN (87% vs. 51%, respectively). A limitation of the present study is that the specificity of the three biomarkers remains undetermined selleck chemicals llc because serum samples from other categories of patients were not tested. In conclusion, our data, based on single-sample estimation per patient, demonstrate the utility of three tested biomarkers in the diagnosis of candidaemia. Further studies are warranted to determine the utility of these markers in the early diagnosis of invasive candidiasis in clinically suspected patients whose blood cultures remain negative. The study was supported by KFAS grant no. 2005-130-205. We are thankful to W. Chehadeh for statistical analysis and to A. Theyyathel and J. Thomas for technical support. None to declare. ""There are limited data comparing the clinical outcomes between telbivudine and entecavir. We consecutively enrolled 115 telbivudine-naive and 115 entecavir-naive chronic hepatitis B patients, who were matched for age, sex, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) status and cirrhosis, and treated for at least 2?years or less than 2?years but had developed resistance. Except for the rate of HBeAg seroconversion, which was similar, patients in the entecavir group had better clinical outcomes than those in the telbivudine group for alanine aminotransferase normalization (85.2% vs 78.4%, p?