Species distribution and susceptibility profiles of Candida species isolated from vulvovaginal candidiasis, emergence of C. lusitaniae

Document Type: Original Articles

Authors

1 Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

2 Invasive Fungi Research Centre (IFRC), Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

3 Infectious and Tropical Diseases Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

4 Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of Hazrat-e- Zainab Hospital, Babolsar, Iran.

5 Department of Medical Mycology, School of Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

Abstract

Background and Purpose: The aim of the current study was to investigate the epidemiology of vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) and recurrent VVC (RVVC), as well as the antifungal susceptibility patterns of Candida species isolates.
Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out on 260 women suspected of VVC from February 2017 to January 2018. In order to identify Candida species isolated from the genital tracts, the isolates were subjected to polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) using enzymes Msp I and sequencing. Moreover, antifungal susceptibility testing was performed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines (M27-A3).
Results: Out of 250 subjects, 75 (28.8%) patients were affected by VVC, out of whom 15 (20%) cases had RVVC. Among the Candida species, C. albicans was the most common species (42/95; 44.21%), followed by C. lusitaniae (18/95; 18.95%), C. parapsilosis (13/95; 13.69%),  C. glabrata (8/95; 8.42%), C. kefyr (6/95; 6.31%), C. famata (5/95; 5.26%), C. africana (2/95; 2.11%), and C. orthopsilosis (1/95; 1.05%), respectively. Multiple Candida species were observed in 28% (21/75) of the patients. Nystatin showed the narrowest range of minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) (0.25-16 μg/ml) against all Candida strains, whereas fluconazole (0.063-64 μg/ml) demonstrated the widest MIC range. In the current study, C. lusitaniae, as the second most common causative agent of VVC, was susceptible to all antifungal agents. Furthermore, 61.1% of C. lusitaniae isolates were inhibited at a concentration of ≤ 2 μg/ml, while38.9% (n=7)of them exhibited fluconazole MICs above the epidemiologic cutoff values (ECV). Candida species showed the highest overall resistance against fluconazole (61.3%), followed by itraconazole (45.2%) and caspofungin (23.7%). All of C. albicans strains were resistant to itraconazole with a MIC value of ≥ 1 μg/ml; in addition, 87.5% of them were resistant to fluconazole. Moreover, 100% and 87.5% of C. glabrata strains were resistant to caspofungin and fluconazole, respectively.
Conclusion: As the findings revealed, the majority of VVC cases were caused by non-albicans Candida species which were often more resistant to antifungal agents. Candida lusitaniae generally had fluconazole MICs above the ECV. Given the propensity of C. lusitaniae to develop resistance under drug pressure, antifungals should be administered with caution. The emergence of these species justify the epidemiological surveillance surveys to watch out the distribution of yeast species.

Keywords


Introduction

Vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) is a kind of opportunistic fungal infection of the lower genital tract in females caused by different Candida species. This infection affects approximately 75% of child-bearing age women at least once in their lifetime and interferes with the quality of sex life. Based on the statistics, 5-10% of VVC patients suffer from recurrent VVC (RVVC) [1]. The VVC affects not only mature women but also young girls. The predisposing factors for young girls to develop VVC include the anatomical features of vagina and its closeness to the rectum, lumbar hair, small labia minor, thin vaginal epithelium, deficiency in estrogen hormones, and genetic issues [2, 3]. In addition, some of the risk factors associated with the development of VVC include antibacterial agent usage, hormonal fluctuations during pregnancy, immune system weakness, use of intrauterine devices for birth control, poor personal hygiene, metabolic disorders (e.g., diabetes mellitus), and stress [4, 5].

The VVC is a highly common problem in diabetic women, owing to a number of factors, such as increase of vaginal mucosa due to the high deposition of glycogen in vaginal tissue [6]. According to the results of the research conducted around the world, the most common causative agent of VVC is Candida albicans (77-95%), followed by non-albicans Candida (NAC) species (20-30%) [7-9]. However, the results of the recent studies are indicative of the growing increase of NAC species [10, 11]. Among NAC species, C. lusitaniae remains a less common cause of vulvovaginitis worldwide; however, this species has a noticeable role in the recurrence of vaginitis [1, 12]. Moreover, based on some reports, this species shows resistance to amphotericin B and cross-resistance to echinocandins and azoles [13, 14]. However, there are limited data regarding the antifungal susceptibility of C. lusitaniae causing VVC.

Azole antifungal agents can be used in the treatment of VVC like it is used for other superficial fungal infections [15]. It is difficult to perform an epidemiological investigation about the incidence, diagnosis, and treatment of VVC given the high rate of self-treatment with over-the-counter (OTC) medications and also the treatment of patients without prescribing laboratory examinations by physicians [16]. The incidence of VVC resistant to azole antifungal is on a growing trend due to the excessive administration of fluconazole and other azoles. The VVC self-diagnosis and self-treatment with OTC antifungal product can occasionally lead to the perpetuation of symptoms and RVVC [17].

Susceptibility to azoles in Candida species is highly variable. The treatment failure, as well as the recurrence and relapse of infection due to the emergence of NAC species resistant to conventional azoles is a worrisome problem [18, 19]. Regarding this, the present study was conducted to identify the etiologic agents of VVC among the women attending a Gynecology Clinic in Babolsar, northern Iran, using polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) and evaluation of the in vitro antifungal susceptibility of Candida species isolated from patients with VVC to eight antifungal drugs. These antifungals included fluconazole (FLC), itraconazole (ITC), miconazole, clotrimazole (CLO), nystatin (NYS), ketoconazole (KET), caspofungin (CAS), and tioconazole (TIC). The ultimate goal was to determine the role of multiple Candida species in the incidence of RVVC.

Materials and Methods

Fungal isolates and patient characterization

A cross-sectional study was carried out on 260 non-pregnant women referring to the Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of Hazrat-e-Zainab Hospital, Babolsar, Iran, from February 2017 to January 2018. All participants enrolled in the study signed consent forms. The women with the clinical evidence of VVC, including burning, itching, cheesy discharge, and pain during intercourse were enrolled in the study. On the other hand, the subjects who had recent vagina douche or any form of antifungal therapy and those unwilling to participate were excluded from the study. The RVVC was defined as four or more episodes of culture-proved VVC in a year.

Two samples of cervical/vaginal discharge were collected from each patient by means of sterile saline wetted cotton-tipped swabs. One swab was used for direct microscopy, and the other one was applied for culture assay. Preliminary diagnoses of specimens were performed using the KOH (10%) mount, gram stain, culture on Sabouraud dextrose agar (SDA) (Merck, Germany), SDA supplemented with 0.5% chloramphenicol, and CHROMagar Candida incubated at 37°C for 48-72 h [20]. The CHROMagar Candida as a differential culture medium can facilitate the identification of mix yeast species in the clinical sample presumptively.

Serial dilutions of mix yeasts were set up on CHROMagar Candida to differentiate and recognition them. The evidence of budding yeast cell with pseudohyphae in direct microscopy and yeast growth was considered VVC. Species identification of grown yeast was performed conventionally using germ tube production in horse serum, chlamydospore test on corn meal agar with Tween 80, and colored colonies. For accurate identification, the yeast isolates were subjected to further investigation, including molecular methods.

DNA Extraction

Genomic DNA was extracted according to our previously described method [20] with some modifications. The isolates were identified by means of ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 gene amplification. Briefly, a loopful of 48-hour grown colonies was suspended in 300 µl of lysis buffer (200 mmol-l Tris-HCl [pH: 7.5], 25 mmol-l EDTA, 0.5% [w/v] SDS, 250 mmol-l NaCl) and then incubated at 100°C for 15 min and centrifuged. The supernatant was added with 200 µl of 3.0 mol–l sodium acetate and incubated at -20°C for an hour and then centrifuged at 12,000 g for 10 min. The supernatants were precipitated with an equal volume of cold isopropanol, centrifuged at 10,000 g for 10 min, washed with 70% of cold ethanol, air-dried, suspended in 50 µl TE buffer (10 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA pH 8), and finally stored at -20°C until needed.

Molecular identification

For the purpose of molecular identification, the samples were subjected to ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 rDNA amplification and restriction enzyme analysis. The restriction enzyme analysis was performed as previously described [21]. Briefly, for each restriction digestion reaction, 10 μl of the amplified PCR product was digested with 1.5 μl of restriction enzyme buffer, 1 μl of restriction enzyme Msp I (Fisher Scientific, Leicestershire, UK), and 2.5 μl of high-performance liquid chromatography grade water. The reaction mixture (15 μl) was incubated at 37°C for 2 h. Restriction fragments were separated by 2% agarose gel in TBE buffer for 1 h at 100 V.

The identification of C. albicans species complex (i.e., C. africana, C. albicans, and C. dubliniensis) was accomplished using the partial amplification of hyphal wall proteins (HWP1) gene according to the primers designed by Romeo and Criseo (forward, 5′-GCTACCACTTCAGAATCATCATC-3′ and reverse 5′-GCACCTTCAGTCGTAGAGACG-3′) that generate the fragments of 940 and 740 bp for C. albicans and C. africana [22]. The discrimination of C. parapsilosis complex, including C. parapsilosis and C. orthopsilosis, was conducted as previously described [23].

In vitro susceptibility testing

Susceptibility of the grown yeasts to FLC, ITC, MIC, CLO, NYS, KET, CAS, and TIC was evaluated using broth microdilution method as recommended by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) M27-A3 and M27-S4 document guidelines [24, 25]. Briefly, the antifungal agents were diluted in the standard RPMI-1640 medium (Sigma Chemical Co. Germany) buffered to pH 7.0 with 0.165 M-morpholinepropanesulfonic acid (Sigma, Germany) and L-glutamine without bicarbonate to yield two times their concentrations.

The buffer medium was dispensed into 96-well microdilution trays at the concentrations of 0.016-16, 0.063-64, and 0.008-8 μg/ml for ITC/KET/NYS/TIC, FLC, and CAS, respectively. The MIC endpoint was defined as 100% and 80% inhibition for NYS and other drugs, respectively. Yeast inoculum onto Sabouraud dextrose in sterile saline (0.85%) was prepared after 24 h of incubation, resulting in a final concentration of 0.5-2.5×103 cells/ml. The plates were incubated at 35°C for 48 h for all antifungals, except for CAS and FLC (for 24 h). For each isolate, drug-free (growth control) and yeast-free (drug control) wells were included, and all isolates were tested in duplicate. Candida parapsilosis (ATCC 22019) was used as a quality control for each series of MIC plate.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained from the Research and Ethics Committee of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Mazandaran, Iran, with a reference number of IR.MAZUMS.REC.95.2313 and dated 22 September 2016.

Results

Isolation and identification of microorganisms

A total of 260 women with the mean age of 32±9.8 years (age range: 17-51 years) suspected of Candida vaginitis were studied at Hazrat-e-Zainab Hospital, Babolsar, Northern of Iran. Based on the results, 75 (%28.8) patients were affected by VVC, out of whom 15 (20%) cases had RVVC. The mean ages of VVC and RVVC patients were 31±7.5 and 28 ±4.4 years, respectively, showing a significant difference (P=0.005). The most prevalent signs and symptoms were itching (32.7%), cheesy discharge (32.5%), burning (22.4%), and dyspareunia (12.3%) (Table 1).

Polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism and HWP1 amplification

Enzymatic digestion with MspI revealed different patterns for yeast isolates (Figure 1). Furthermore, the partial amplification of HWP1 gene for C. albicans and C. africana strains yielded a single band with sizes of ̴1000 and 750 bp, respectively (Figure 2). A total of 95 Candida strains were isolated from 75 infected patients (Table 2). The most prevalent species was C. albicans (42/95; 44.22%), followed by C. lusitaniae (18/95; 18.95%), C. parapsilosis (13/95; 13.69%), C. glabrata (8/95; 8.41%), C. kefyr (6/95; 6.31%), C. famata (5/95; 5.26%), C. africana (2/95; 2.11%), and C. orthopsilosis (1/95; 1.05%) (Tables 2). Only one Candida species was identified in 72% (54/75) of the patients. Mixed infections with multiple Candida species (two or more) were observed in 28% (21/75) of the patients with Candida vulvovaginitis. Out of this group, 71.4% (15/21) of the patients suffered from RVVC. In 85.7% (18/21) of the patients with multiple species, Candida albicans were mixed with other NACs. In 19% (4/21) of the cases, 3 different Candida species were obtained from patients with RVVC (Table 3). Two C. africana isolates were mixed with other Candida species; therefore, it was not possible to determine their antifungal susceptibility due to the difficulty of separating them.

Age groups
N (%) RVVC N VVC N
50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10-19 50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10-19
37 (49.3%) - - 3 7 - 1 4 8 14 - Burning
53 (70.6%) - - 4 8 1 2 3 14 20 1 Itching
52 (69.3%) - - 4 8 1 1 3 13 20 2 Cheesy discharge
22 (29.3%) - - 1 5 1 1 2 5 6 1 Dyspareunia
Table 1.Signs and symptoms in patients with vulvovaginal candidiasis and recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis regarding age groups

Figure 1.Polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism assay (1.5% agarose gel electrophoresis) of ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 gene after restricting polymorphic region with MspI enzyme; lanes 1, 2, 4, and 5) C. parapsilosis, lane 3) C. glabrata, lanes 6, 8, and 12) C. famata, lanes 7 and 13) C. albicans, lanes 9 and 11) C. lusitaniae, lane 10) C. glabrata, and last lane) a 100-bp molecular ladder

Figure 2.Polymerase chain reaction amplification of HWP1 gene; lanes 1, 2, and 4) C. albicans, lane 3) C. africana, and lane M) a 100-bp molecular ladder

Total (%) RVVC N (%) VVC N (%) Candida species
50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10-19 50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10-19
42 (44.22) - - 3 (3.15) 8 (8.43) 1 (1.05) - 4 (4.22) 12 (12.63) 14 (14.74) - C. albicans
18 (18.95) - - - 3 (3.15) - 1 (1.05) 2 (2.11) 3 (3.15) 7 (7.37) 2 (2.11) C. lusitaniae
13 (13.69) - - 2 (2.11) 1 (1.05) 1 (1.05) - - 4 (4.22) 5 (5.26) - C. parapsilosis
8 (8.41) - - 2 (2.11) 3 (3.15) - 1 (1.05) - 1 (1.05) 1 (1.05) - C. glabrata
6 (6.31) - - 2 (2.11) 1 (1.05) - - - 3 (3.15) - - C. kefyr
5 (5.26) - - - 2 (2.11) - 1 (1.05) 1 (1.05) - 1 (1.05) - C. famata
2 (2.11) 1 (1.05) - - - 1 (1.05) - C. africana
1 (1.05) - - - 1 (1.05) - - - - - - C. orthopsilosis
95 (100) - - 10 (10.53) 19 (20) 2 (2.11) 3 (3.15) 7 (7.38) 24 (25.26) 28 (29.47) 2 (2.11) Total (%)
Table 2.Identification of Candida species in patients with vulvovaginal candidiasis and recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis regarding age groups using the amplification of ITS1‑ITS4 regions, restriction analysis, and partial amplification of hyphal wall proteins (HWP1) gene
Candida species RVVC VVC Total
C. albicans and C. kefyr 3 1 4
C. glabrata and C. kefyr 1 0 1
C. albicans and C. parapsilosis 2 0 2
C. albicans and C. orthopsilosis 1 0 1
C. albicans and C. africana 0 1 1
C. albicans, C. parapsilosis, and C. lusitaniae 1 0 1
C. glabrata and C. famata 1 0 1
C. albicans and C. famata 0 2 2
C. albicans, C. kefyr, and C .lusitaniae 1 0 1
C. albicans, C. famata, and C. lusitaniae 1 0 1
C. albicans , C. glabrata, C. parapsilosis, and C. africana 1 0 1
C. albicans and C. lusitaniae 1 2 3
C. parapsilosis, C. glabrata, and C. lusitaniae 1 0 1
C. albicans and C. glabrata 1 0 1
Total 15 6 21
Table 3.Distribution of multiple Candida species* in patients with recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis and vulvovaginal candidiasis
Isolates Antifungal agents 0.016 0.032 0.063 0.125 0.25 0.5 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 %Resistant (n) %I(n) %S(n) MIC Range µg/mL MIC50 µg/mL MIC90 µg/mL G-Mean µg/mL Mode µg/mL
C. albicans (n=42) FLC 6 7 3 26 85.7% (36) 14.3% (6) 0 4-64 64 64 28.5 64
ITC 3 6 10 22 1 100% (42) 0 0 2-32 16 16 8.8 16
MIC 2 3 6 21 5 5 - - - 0.5-16 4 15.2 3.80 4
CLO 1 11 1 4 25 - - - 1-16 16 16 7.48 16
NYS 2 6 13 16 5 - - - 0.25-4 1.5 3.8 1.30 2
KET 2 1 1 11 7 20 - - - 0.5-16 8 16 7.48 16
CAS 13 7 4 12 1 5 42.8% (18) 9.5% (4) %47.7(20) 0.063-4 0.5 3.8 0.37 0.063
TIC 2 3 11 6 20 - - - 1-16 8 16 7.61 16
C. lusitaniae (n=18) FLC 2 9 1 1 2 3 - - - 0.5-64 2 16 3.26 2
ITC 2 11 4 1 - - 0.5-4 1 2 1.27 1
MIC 1 9 4 2 2 - - - 0.25-4 0.5 2.8 0.78 0.5
CLO 12 6 - - - 1-2 1 2 1.44 1
NYS 2 12 4 - - - 0.5-2 1 2 1.08 1
KET 1 12 4 1 - - - 0.25-8 0.5 1 0.66 0.5
CAS 10 4 4 - - - 0.25-1 0.25 1 0.40 0.25
TIC 13 2 3 - - - 0.5-2 0.5 1.4 0.61 0.5
C. parapsilosis (n=13) FLC 5 1 1 2 4 57.1% (8) 7.1% (1) %35.7(5) 2-64 12 64 10.76 2
ITC 1 1 5 1 5 - - - 0.5-16 5 16 4.64 16
MIC 4 3 1 1 4 - - - 1-16 3 16 4 16
CLO 2 5 1 5 - - - 2-16 6 16 6.89 4
NYS 1 7 5 - - - 0.5-16 4 16 6.24 4
KET 1 2 4 6 - - - 0. 125-16 8.25 16 2.002 16
CAS 1 2 5 5 42.8% (6) 35.7% (5) %21.4(3) 0.032-8 4 8 3.45 8
TIC 1 2 7 3 - - - 0.063-8 8 16 6.24 8
C. glabrata (n=8) FLC 1 7 87.5% (7) 12.5% (1) 8-64 64 64 45.25 64
ITC 1 4 3 - - - 1-16 8 16 8 8
MIC 1 5 2 - - - 2-16 8 16 8 8
CLO 1 - - - 0.5-16 16 16 10.37 16
NYS 1 2 5 - - - 0.5-16 16 16 5.18 16
KET 5 3 - - - 1-16 1 16 2.82 1
CAS 2 1 2 1 2 100% (8) 0 0 0.5-8 2 8 2 0.5
TIC 2 1 2 1 1 1 - - - 0.25-16 2 10.4 1.83 0.25
C. kefyr (n=6) FLC 2 4 100% (6) 0 0 32-64 64 64 50.79 64
ITC 2 2 2 - - - 4-16 8 16 8 4
MIC 1 1 4 - - - 1-16 16 16 8.97 16
CLO 1 5 - - - 8-16 16 16 14.25 16
NYS 1 3 2 - - - 1-8 2 8 2.82 2
KET 6 - - - 8-8 8 8 8 8
CAS 1 5 100% (6) 0 0. 25-2 2 2 1.41 2
TIC 2 1 1 2 - - - 0.125-4 2.25 8 1.12 0.125
C. famata (n=5) FLC 3 1 1 - - - 0.063-8 0.063 5.6 0.33 0.063
ITC 1 2 1 1 - - - 0.016-8 0.032 5.2 0.167 0.032
MIC 4 1 - - - 0.125-1 0.125 0.65 0.189 0.125
CLO 3 1 1 - - - 0.125-8 0.125 5 0.37 0.125
NYS 3 1 1 - - - 0.25-1 0.25 0.8 0.37 0.25
KET 2 1 1 1 - - - 0.016-2 0.032 1.4 0.096 0.016
CAS 1 2 1 1 - - - 0.063-0.5 0.125 0.4 0.162 0.125
TIC 1 1 1 1 1 - - - 0.016-0.5 0.063 0.4 0.083 0.016
C. orthopsilosis (n=1) FLC 1 100% (1) ND ND ND ND -
ITC 1 - - - ND ND ND ND -
MIC 1 - - - ND ND ND ND -
CLO 1 - - - ND ND ND ND -
NYS 1 - - - ND ND ND ND -
KET 1 - - - ND ND ND ND -
CAS 1 100% (1) ND ND ND ND -
TIC 1 ND ND ND ND -
All Candida species(n = 93) FLC 3 2 15 8 11 4 5 45 61.3% (57) 8 5 0.063-64 32 64 13.68 64
ITC 1 2 3 14 12 9 18 33 1 45.2% (42) - - 0.016-32 8 16 4.37 16
MIC 4 1 11 13 12 24 12 16 0.125-16 4 16 2.69 4
CLO 3 2 13 19 6 7 43 - - - 0.125-16 8 16 4.89 16
NYS 5 11 29 23 12 2 11 - - - 0.25-16 2 16 1.76 1
KET 2 1 1 3 19 10 2 11 14 30 - - - 0.016-16 4 16 2.77 16
CAS 15 2 19 11 17 10 11 8 23.7% (22) 9 29 0.063-8 0.5 4 0.64 0.25
TIC 1 1 2 2 3 15 5 8 15 16 25 - - - 0.016-16 4 16 2.77 16
FLC: fluconazole, ITC: itraconazole, MIC: miconazole, CLO: clotrimazole, NYS: nystatin, KET: ketoconazole, CAS: caspofungin, TIC: tioconazole, ND: not determined, R: resistance, I: intermediate, S: susceptible
Table 4.In vitro antifungal susceptibility of eight antifungal agents against 93 Candida species isolated from patients with vulvovaginal candidiasis (Numbers in red boldface are mode value)

In vitro susceptibility testing

Table 4 summarizes the MIC ranges, MIC50, MIC90, and geometric mean (GM) MIC values of antifungal drugs against all Candida isolates. The widest MIC range for all Candida strains was obtained for FLC (0.063-64 μg/ml), while the narrowest MIC range found for NYS (0.25-16 μg/ml). The GM MIC values for CAS, NYS, MIC, KET/TIC, ITC, CLO, and FLC against all strains were 0.64, 1.76, 2.69, 2.77, 4.37, 4.89, and 13.68 µg/mL, respectively. Candida albicans, isolated in this study, demonstrated greatest resistance to FLC (n=36; 85.7%); in this regard, the growth of only 6 (14.3%) isolates were inhibited at ≤ 4 μg/ml (Table 4). Moreover, all C. albicans strains were resistant to ITC with a MIC value of ≥ 1 μg/ml.

In the current study, C. lusitaniae, as the second most common causative agent of VVC, showed susceptibility to all antifungals. In addition, the growth of the majority of these species was inhibited at a concentration of ≤ 2 μg/ml (Table 4). Seven C. lusitaniae isolates exhibited FLC MICs above the epidemiologic cutoff values (ECV; 4-64 μg/ml). Six isolates of C. kefyr showed the highest susceptibility to CAS and TIC with the GM MIC values of 1.41 and 1.12 μg/ml, respectively (Table 4). Furthermore, CAS and TIC also inhibited the growth of 5 C. famata isolates at a concentration of ≤ 0.5 μg/ml. All of C. glabrata strains were resistant to CAS, and 87.5% of them were resistant to FLC (Table 4).

Discussion

Vulvovaginal candidiasis is a common lower genital tract infection in pregnant and child bearing age women. The majority of patients with VVC are diagnosed by signs and symptoms without using laboratory findings, and infection is not confirmed. The present study targeted non-pregnant women in order to identify the distribution of Candida species in VVC and RVVC cases and determine their antifungal susceptibility patterns. In this study, the prevalence of VVC and RVVC was estimated by laboratory and clinical criteria. Although the prevalence rate of VVC (28.8%) in our study was within the reported range, it was slightly higher than the rates reported by Abbasi Nejat et al. [26], Diba et al. [27], and Hedayati et al. [28]. However, our obtained rate was lower than the prevalence rates presented by Mukasa et al. [29] and Bitew et al. [30].

Some of the potential factors for differences in the occurrence and/or recurrence of VVC among studies are sociodemographic characteristics, diabetes mellitus, dietary habits, personal hygiene, sexual activity, immunological status, and use of antibiotics, immunosuppressant, or oral contraceptives, which are various and conflicting [30]. In the current study, age was investigated as a possible risk factor for the occurrence of VVC and RVVC. Our finding regarding age as an important risk factor was consistent with those of similar earlier studies [27, 28] (Table 1). In the current study, the mean ages of the patients with VVC and RVVC were 31±7.5 and 28±4.4 years, respectively, showing a significant difference (P=0.005). Our finding is consistent with those obtained by Bitew et al. [30].

Furthermore, in the current study, out of 75 patients with VVC, 15 (20%) patients were diagnosed with RVVC. The prevalence rates of RVVC were reported as 24.2% and 12.2% in previous studies [26, 27]. In the current investigation, a total of six Candida species were detected. The prevalence rate of C. albicans as the most prevalent species associated with vulvovaginitis was obtained as 44.22%. Furthermore, the overall prevalence of NAC species was 55.78% with C. lusitaniae as the most predominant species.

The NAC species isolated from the patients complaining of genital tract infection included C. lusitaniae (n=18, 18.95%), C. parapsilosis (n=13, 13.69%), C. glabrata (n=8, 8.41%), C. kefyr (n=6, 6.31 %), C. famata (n=5, 5.26%), C. africana (n=2, 2.11%), and C. orthopsilosis (n=1, 1.05%). In our study, C. lusitaniae was the second most prevalent isolate. Candida lusitaniae is an opportunistic yeast isolated much less commonly than other Candida species causing vaginitis. It was first described as a common isolate from the gastrointestinal tract of warm-blool animals [31].

Candida lusitaniae is an emerging yeast pathogen that infects immunocompromised patients with cancer and HIV/AIDS (32-38). This species has been isolated from the urine, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, blood, peritoneal fluid, kidney, vagina, and skin [38-42]. Candida lusitaniae has been rarely recovered (0.6-2.5%) from patients with candidemia [43, 44]. It is haploid and germ tube negative and like C. glabrata has propensity to develop resistance to antifungals mainly to amphotericin B, azoles, and fluocytosine [45]. In CHROMagar Candida medium (CHROMagar Company, Paris, France), light to dark brown colored colonies are grown. This species is phylogenetically related to C. auris [46].

In a study, infection with C. lusitaniae showed a high rate of intrinsic resistance to amphotericin so that susceptibility testing was not required [47]. Although C. lusitaniae clinical isolates show no reduced susceptibility [44], in some research, it elevated the MICs for echinocandins [48], which are used as the first-line therapy of candidemia. Recently, an unusual emerging resistance to echinocandins has been shown due to mutation in FKS genes in clinical cases and experimental animal model [49]. In addition, there is evidence regarding the development of cross-resistance to azoles and echinocandins following combination antifungal treatment [14].

In our study, caspofungin values were below the ECVs of 0.5-1 μg/ml that would be considered non-wild using the ECVs reported by Lockhart et al. [48]. There is no valid CLSI susceptibility breakpoint for less prevalent Candida species like C. lusitaniae. In this case, the ECVs defined as the highest susceptibility endpoint of the wild-type MIC population. The ECVs can facilitate the detection of the emergence of in vitro resistance and help physicians in managing fungal infection where breakpoints are not available [50]. However, these values will not categorize a fungal isolate as susceptible or resistant and do not predict clinical response as breakpoints do [51]

The recovery rate of C. albicans as the most common species isolated from patients with VVC was similar with those of numerous studies. Nonetheless, the recovery percentage of NAC vaginitis (55.78%) was higher than the rates reported in two previous studies presenting lower rates of 28.7% and 41.4%, respectively [25, 29]. Similar to other studies that reported a high recovery percentage (65.0% and 57.5%) for NAC species in Egypt and Iran [28, 52], it seems that there has been a growing shift towards NAC species.

Documented information regarding the prevalence of NAC isolated from Iranian patients causing vulvovaginitis revealed C. glabrata as the most common yeast among the NAC species causing vaginitis [26, 28, 53]. It should be noted that C. lusitaniae has been rarely reported as the causative agent of VVC in the studies conducted in Iran. It seems that the high prevalence of C. lusitaniae in Babolsar, Iran, is related to some factors, such as the accurate identification of this agent from other Candida species using PCR-RFLP and sequencing, quite good sampling, genetic adaptability of this species to this geographic area, and different populations. In addition, there is no report regarding the distribution pattern of Candida species in this region.

In a study performed by Mukasa et al. [29], C. glabrata was reported as the most commonly isolated NAC species (14.3%), followed by C. krusei (3.3%), C. parapsilosis (8.9%), C. tropicalis (1.44%), C. famata (0.96%), C. parapsilosis (0.48%), and C. lusitaniae (0.48%). In contrast to our study, C. lusitaniae was the dominant NAC species (18.95%), followed by C. parapsilosis (13.69%), C. glabrata (8.41%), C. kefyr (6.5%), and C. famata (6.31%).

Similar to our study, in a study carried out by Bitew et al. [30], different recovery rates were reported for NAC species. The results of the mentioned study demonstrated C. krusei as the dominant NAC species, followed by C. dubliniensis, C. glabrata, C. tropicalis, C. kefyr, C. parapsilosis, C. guilliermondii, C. lusitaniae, and C. inconspicua. It was suggested that the increase of NAC species, isolated from patients complaining of genital tract infection naturally resistant to antifungal agents, is probably related to the widespread and inappropriate use of azole antifungals [1, 54].

Therefore, the most logical cause of NAC species emergence is low sensitivity to azole antifungal agents, compared with Candida species isolated frequently from patients [55]. Similar to other studies, mixed infection was seen in our patients [1]. Laboratories should be able to detect mixed cultures in primary cultures because it is an important issue for the management of VVC patients. In addition, the determination of in vitro antifungal susceptibility pattern is highly important before deciding on a specific treatment and introducing new antifungal agents in order to predict the outcome of treatment for the routine surveillance of fungal infections.

Fluconazole is first-line therapy for the treatment and prevention of candidiasis; however, the prolonged use of this antifungal agent has contributed to the development of antifungal drug resistance in Candida isolates. In the present study, C. kefyr, C. glabrata/C. albicans, and C. parapsilosis showed the resistance rates of 100%, 87%, and 57% to FLC, respectively, which were higher, compared to the values reported in other studies [1, 26, 29]. Regarding ITC, C. glabrata was absolutely resistant to this medication, which is similar to the results obtained by Mukasa et al. [29].

Unlike other reports, in the current study, C. albicans and C. parapsilosis were found to be absolutely resistant to ITC. Abbasi Nejat et al. [26] found that all isolates were highly susceptible to amphotericin B. With regard to CAS, the resistance rates were obtained as 100% and 42.8% for C. glabrata and C. albicans/C. parapsilosis, respectively. In contrast, Bitew et al. [30] found that all of the yeast isolates were 100% susceptible to this medication. In the present study, the isolates showed reduced MICs to caspofungin with an MIC90 of 8 μg/ml and resistance rate of 23.7%.

Overall, in terms of GM MICs, CAS demonstrated potent activity against almost all yeast isolates (n=63) in comparison with FLC, ITC, MIC, CLO, NYS, KET, and TIC. In this study, C. famata was susceptible to all medications. While in a study performed in Uganda, 100% of C. famata showed resistance to ITC, and 50% of them were resistant to CLO [29]. The high prevalence rate of NAC species with reduced susceptibility to azole antifungal agent in the current study is in line with some recent reports that have indicated that resistance to antifungal drugs may also be an important factor for VVC.

Conclusion

As the findings indicated, NAC species were the most common yeast isolates obtained from patients with VVC infection and C. lusitaniae being the generally predominant species. Given the propensity of C. lusitaniae to develop resistance under drug pressure, antifungals should be administered with caution. The emergence of these species justifies the implementation of epidemiological surveillance surveys to watch out the distribution of yeast species. Overall, in vitro antifungal susceptibility testing is an essential measure for choosing the correct antifungal agents for appropriate therapy. However, it is required to perform prospective studies in our region to track the changing trend in antifungal susceptibility and development of mutation under the widespread use and abuse of OTC antifungals, especially in RVVC cases.

References

  1. Richter SS, Galask RP, Messer SA, Hollis RJ, Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA. Antifungal susceptibilities of Candida species causing vulvovaginitis and epidemiology of recurrent cases. J Clin Microbiol. 2005; 43(5):2155-62.
  2. Alizadeh M, Kolecka A, Boekhout T, Zarrinfar H, Ghanbari Nahzag MA, Badiee P. Identification of Candida species isolated from vulvovaginitis using matrix assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry. Curr Med Mycol. 2017; 3(4):21-5.
  3. Vandeven AM, Emans S. Vulvovaginitis in the child and adolescent. Pediatr Rev. 1993; 14(4):141-7.
  4. Minooeianhaghighi MH, Sehatpour M, Shokri H. Determination of drug susceptibility of Candida strains isolated from patients with recurrent Candida vulvovaginitis and investigation of predisposing factors of the disease. Avicenna J Clin Med. 2017; 23(4):336-44.
  5. Gonçalves B, Ferreira C, Alves CT, Henriques M, Azeredo J, Silva S. Vulvovaginal candidiasis: epidemiology, microbiology and risk factors. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2016; 42(6):905-27.
  6. Malazy OT, Shariat M, Heshmat R, Majlesi F, Alimohammadian M, Tabari NK. Vulvovaginal candidiasis and its related factors in diabetic women. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 46(4):399-404.
  7. Noori M, Dakhili M, Sepahvand A, Davari N. Evaluation of esterase and hemolysin activities of different Candida species isolated from vulvovaginitis cases in Lorestan Province, Iran. Curr Med Mycol. 2017; 3(4):1-5.
  8. Nazeri M, Mesdaghinia E, Moravej SA, Atabakhshiyan R, Soleymani F. Prevalence of vulvovaginal candidiasis and frequency of candida species in women. J Mazandaran Univ Med Sci. 2012; 21(86):254-62.
  9. Dovnik A, Golle A, Novak D, Arko D, Takac I. Treatment of vulvovaginal candidiasis: a review of the literature. Acta Dermatovenerol Alp Pannonica Adriat. 2015; 24(1):5-7.
  10. Khanmohamadi M, Mehbod AS, Noraeepour M, Didehdar M. Molecular identification of candida species isolated from women with vulvovaginal candidiasis: brief report. Tehran Univ Med J. 2017; 75(7):538-42.
  11. Fornari G, Vicente VA, Gomes RR, Muro MD, Pinheiro RL, Ferrari C. Susceptibility and molecular characterization of Candida species from patients with vulvovaginitis. Braz J Microbiol. 2016; 47(2):373-80.
  12. Silverman NS, Morgan M, Nichols WS. Candida lusitaniae as an unusual cause of recurrent vaginitis and its successful treatment with intravaginal boric acid. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 9(4):245-7.
  13. Favel A, Michel-Nguyen A, Peyron F, Martin C, Thomachot L, Datry A. Colony morphology switching of Candida lusitaniae and acquisition of multidrug resistance during treatment of a renal infection in a newborn: case report and review of the literature. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2003; 47(1):331-9.
  14. Asner SA, Giulieri S, Diezi M, Marchetti O, Sanglard D. Acquired multidrug antifungal resistance in Candida lusitaniae during therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015; 59(12):7715-22.
  15. Khosravi Rad K, Falahati M, Roudbary M, Farahyar S, Nami S. Overexpression of MDR-1 and CDR-2 genes in fluconazole resistance of Candida albicans isolated from patients with vulvovaginal candidiasis. Curr Med Mycol. 2016; 2(4):24-29.
  16. Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes DR, Clancy CJ, Marr KA, Ostrosky-Zeichner L. Clinical practice guideline for the management of candidiasis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2015; 62(4):e1-50.
  17. Walker PP, Reynolds MT, Ashbee HR, Brown C, Evans EG. Vaginal yeasts in the era of “over the counter” antifungals. Sex Transm Infect. 2000; 76(6):437-8.
  18. Rex JH, Rinaldi M, Pfaller M. Resistance of Candida species to fluconazole. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1995; 39(1):1-8.
  19. Sharifynia S, Falahati M, Akhlaghi L, Foroumadi A, Fateh R. Molecular identification and antifungal susceptibility profile of Candida species isolated from patients with vulvovaginitis in Tehran, Iran. J Res Med Sci. 2017; 22:132.
  20. Didehdar M, Khansarinejad B, Amirrajab N, Shokohi T. Development of a high‐resolution melting analysis assay for rapid and high‐throughput identification of clinically important dermatophyte species. Mycoses. 2016; 59(7):442-9.
  21. Shokohi T, Soteh MH, Pouri ZS, Hedayati M, Mayahi S. Identification of Candida species using PCR-RFLP in cancer patients in Iran. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2010; 28(2):147-51.
  22. Romeo O, Criseo G. First molecular method for discriminating between Candida africana, Candida albicans, and Candida dubliniensis by using hwp1 gene. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2008; 62(2):230-3.
  23. Abastabar M, Hosseinpoor S, Hedayati MT, Shokohi T, Valadan R, Mirhendi H. Hyphal wall protein 1 gene: a potential marker for the identification of different Candida species and phylogenetic analysis. Curr Med Mycol. 2016; 2(4):1-8.
  24. Rex JH, Alexander BD, Andes D, Arthington-Skaggs B, Brown SD, Chaturveli V. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi: CLSI document M38–A2. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA; 2008.
  25. Santos ER, Dal Forno CF, Hernandez MG, Kubiça TF, Venturini TP, Chassot F. Susceptibility of Candida spp isolated from blood cultures as evaluated using the M27-A3 and new M27-S4 approved breakpoints. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2014; 56(6):477-82.
  26. Abbasi Nejat Z, Farahyar S, Falahati M, Khozani M, Hosseini A, Faiazy A. Molecular identification and antifungal susceptibility pattern of non-albicans candida species isolated from vulvovaginal candidiasis. Iran Biomed J. 2018; 22(1):33-41.
  27. Diba K, Namaki A, Ayatolahi H, Hanifian H. Comparison of biochemical and molecular methods for the identification of candida species causing vulvovaginal candidiasis and recurring vulvovaginal candidiasis. Iran J Med Microbiol. 2014; 8(3):45-50.
  28. Hedayati MT, Taheri Z, Galinimoghadam T, Aghili SR, Yazdani Cherati J, Mosayebi E. Isolation of different species of Candida in patients with vulvovaginal candidiasis from Sari, Iran. Jundishapur J Microbiol. 2015; 8(4):e15992.
  29. Mukasa KJ, Herbert I, Daniel A, Sserunkuma KL, Joel B, Frederick B. Antifungal susceptibility patterns of vulvovaginal Candida species among women attending antenatal clinic at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, South Western Uganda. Br Microbiol Res J. 2015; 5(4):322-31.
  30. Bitew A, Abebaw Y. Vulvovaginal candidiasis: species distribution of Candida and their antifungal susceptibility pattern. BMC Womens Health. 2018; 18(1):94.
  31. Meyer SA, Payne RW, Yarrow D. Candida berkhout. The yeasts. 1998;893-1084.
  32. Atkinson BJ, Lewis RE, Kontoyiannis DP. Candida lusitaniae fungemia in cancer patients: risk factors for amphotericin B failure and outcome. Med Mycol. 2008; 46(6):541-6.
  33. Blinkhorn RJ, Adelstein D, Spagnuolo PJ. Emergence of a newopportunistic pathogen, Candida lusitaniae. J Clin Microbiol. 1989; 27(2):236-40.
  34. Hawkins JL, Baddour LM. Candida lusitaniae infections in the era of fluconazole availability. Clin Infect Dis. 2003; 36(2):e14-8.
  35. Minari A, Hachem R, Raad I. Candida lusitaniae: a cause of breakthrough fungemia in cancer patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2001; 32(2):186-90.
  36. Reedy JL, Floyd AM, Heitman J. Mechanistic plasticity of sexual reproduction and meiosis in the Candida pathogenic species complex. Curr Biol. 2009; 19(11):891-9.
  37. Pappagianis D, Collins MS, Hector R, Remington J. Development of resistance to amphotericin B in Candida lusitaniae infecting a human. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1979; 16(2):123-6.
  38. Zhang J, Silao FG, Bigol UG, Bungay AA, Nicolas MG, Heitman J. Calcineurin is required for pseudohyphal growth, virulence, and drug resistance in Candida lusitaniae. PLoS One. 2012; 7(8):e44192.
  39. Baker JG, Nadler HL, Forgacs P, Kurtz SR. Candida lusitaniae: a new opportunistic pathogen of the urinary tract. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1984; 2(2):145-9.
  40. Desnos-Ollivier M, Moquet O, Chouaki T, Guerin AM, Dromer F. Development of echinocandin resistance in Clavispora lusitaniae during caspofungin treatment. J Clin Microbiol. 2011; 49(6):2304-6.
  41. Merz WG. Candida lusitaniae: frequency of recovery, colonization, infection, and amphotericin B resistance. J Clin Microbiol. 1984; 20(6):1194-5.
  42. Diba K, Makhdoomi K, Nasri E, Vaezi A, Javidnia J, Gharabagh DJ. Emerging Candida species isolated from renal transplant recipients: Species distribution and susceptibility profiles. Microb Pathog. 2018; 125:240-5.
  43. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Epidemiology of invasive candidiasis: a persistent public health problem. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2007; 20(1):133-63.
  44. Khan Z, Ahmad S, Al-Sweih N, Khan S, Joseph L. Candida lusitaniae in Kuwait: prevalence, antifungal susceptibility and role in neonatal fungemia. PLoS One. 2019; 14(3):e0213532.
  45. Florent M, Noël T, Ruprich-Robert G, Da Silva B, Fitton-Ouhabi V, Chastin C. Nonsense and missense mutations in FCY2 and FCY1 genes are responsible for flucytosine resistance and flucytosine-fluconazole cross-resistance in clinical isolates of Candida lusitaniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009; 53(7):2982-90.
  46. Shen XX, Zhou X, Kominek J, Kurtzman CP, Hittinger CT, Rokas A. Reconstructing the backbone of the Saccharomycotina yeast phylogeny using genome-scale data. G3 (Bethesda). 2016; 6(12):3927-39.
  47. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Progress in antifungal susceptibility testing of Candida spp by use of clinical and laboratory standards institute broth microdilution methods, 2010 to 2012. J Clin Microbiol. 2012; 50(9):2846-56.
  48. Lockhart SR, Pham CD, Kuykendall RJ, Bolden CB, Cleveland AA. Candida lusitaniae MICs to the echinocandins are elevated but FKS-mediated resistance is rare. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016; 84(1):52-4.
  49. Arendrup MC, Perlin DS. Echinocandin resistance: an emerging clinical problem?. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2014; 27(6):484-92.
  50. Espinel-Ingroff A, Pfaller MA, Bustamante B, Canton E, Fothergill A, Fuller J. Multilaboratory study of epidemiological cutoff values for detection of resistance in eight Candida species to fluconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014; 58(4):2006-12.
  51. Espinel-Ingroff A, Turnidge J. The role of epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs/ECOFFs) in antifungal susceptibility testing and interpretation for uncommon yeasts and moulds. Rev Iberoam Micol. 2016; 33(2):63-75.
  52. Haleim M, El-Feky E, Sayed A, Kadry D, Mahmoud A, Rana A. Prevalence of Candida non albicans species associated with vulvovaginal candidiasis in Egyptian women. Int J Adv Health Sci. 2015; 2(3):304-13.
  53. Fattahi BA, Hoseinzadeh A, Jafari AA, Naghshi JM. Frequency distribution of candidal vaginitis in women referred to health centers in Yazd. J Community Health Res. 2014; 3(3):163-7.
  54. Safdar A, Chaturvedi V, Cross EW, Park S, Bernard EM, Armstrong D. Prospective study of Candida species in patients at a comprehensive cancer center. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001; 45(7):2129-33.
  55. Capoor MR, Nair D, Deb M, Verma PK, Srivastava L, Aggarwal P. Emergence of non-albicans Candida species and antifungal resistance in a tertiary care hospital. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2005; 58(6):344-8.