In vitro activity of five antifungal agents against Candida albicans isolates, Sari, Iran

Authors

1 Department of Medical Mycology and Parasitology, School of Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

2 Invasive Fungal Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran

3 Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, School of Paramedicine/Infectious & Tropical Diseases Research Center, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

4 Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Medicine, Fasa University of Medical Sciences, Fasa, Iran

5 Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Fasa University of Medical Sciences, Fasa, Iran

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Candida albicans is the most common causative agent of candidiasis. Candidiasis
management is dependent on the immune status of the host, severity of disease, and the choice of antifungal drug.
Antifungals, specifically triazoles, are widely administered for the treatment of invasive fungal infections. Herein, we
aimed to evaluate the in vitro susceptibility of C. albicans isolates to fluconazole (FLZ), itraconazole (ITZ), voriconazole
(VRZ), amphotericin B (AMB), and Caspofungin (CAS).
Materials and Methods: A total of 44 clinical strains of C. albicans were collected from 36 patients admitted to four
hospitals in Mazandaran Province, Iran. The in vitro antifungal susceptibility testing was performed based on the Clinical
and Laboratory Standards Institute methods.
Results: Generally, 34 isolates were susceptible to all the five antifungal drugs, while four isolates were susceptible or
susceptible dose-dependent (SDD) and six isolates were SDD or resistant to these antifungals. The lowest minimum
inhibitory concentration (MIC; 0.016 μg/ml) belonged to AMB and the highest MIC was for FLZ (16 μg/ml). The lowest
MIC50 (0.063 μg/ml) was related to ITZ and the lowest MIC90 (0.25 μg/ml) pertained to CAS; in addition, the highest
MIC50 (1 μg/ml) and MIC90 (4 μg/ml) were for FLZ. Four of the isolates showed resistance to both FLZ and VRZ,
separately, and five isolates were resistant to ITZ. Caspofungin showed potent activity against more than 95% of the C.
albicans isolates.
Conclusion: Overall, we reported 9.1% resistance to FLZ and VRZ, 11.3% resistance to ITZ and AMB, and 4.6%
resistance to caspofungin. Our finding is in agreement with previous observations proposing that C. albicans isolates
develop resistance to some antifungal drugs such as FLZ since they are widely used as prophylaxis.

Keywords

References

1. Odds FC, Bougnoux ME, Shaw DJ, Bain JM, Davidson AD, Diogo D, et al. Molecular phylogenetics of Candida albicans. Eukaryot cell. 2007; 6(6):1041-52.
2. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Epidemiology of invasive candidiasis: a persistent public health problem. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2007; 20(1):133-63.
3. Mandras N, Tullio V, Allizond V, Scalas D, Banche G, Roana J, et al. In vitro activities of fluconazole and voriconazole against clinical isolates of Candida spp. determined by disk diffusion testing in Turin, Italy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009; 53(4):1657-9.
4. Wisplinghoff H, Bischoff T, Tallent SM, Seifert H, Wenzel RP, Edmond MB. Nosocomial bloodstream infections in US hospitals: analysis of 24,179 cases from a prospective nationwide surveillance study. Clin Infect Dis. 2004; 39(3):309-17.
5. Edmond MB, Wallace SE, McClish DK, Pfaller MA, Jones RN, Wenzel RP. Nosocomial bloodstream infections in United States hospitals: a three-year analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 1999; 29(2):239-44.
6. Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Boyken L, Hollis R, Rice C, Tendolkar S, et al. In vitro activities of voriconazole, posaconazole, and fluconazole against 4,169 clinical isolates of Candida spp. and Cryptococcus neoformans collected during 2001 and 2002 in the ARTEMIS global antifungal surveillance program. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2004; 48(3):201-5.
7. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Messer SA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ. Activities of fluconazole and voriconazoleagainst 1,586 recent clinical isolates of Candida species determined by broth microdilution, disk diffusion, and Etest methods: report from the ARTEMIS Global Antifungal Susceptibility Program, 2001. J Clin Microbiol. 2003; 41(4):1440-6.
8. Ostrosky-Zeichner L, Rex JH, Pappas PG, Hamill RJ, Larsen  , Horowitz HW, et al. Antifungal susceptibility survey of 2,000 bloodstream Candida isolates in the United States. Antimicrob Agents
Chemother. 2003; 47(10):3149-54.
9. Odds FC. Molecular phylogenetics and epidemiology of Candida albicans. Future Microbiol. 2010;
5(1):67-79. 
10. Afsarian MH, Badali H, Boekhout T, Shokohi T, Katiraee F. Multilocus sequence typing of Candida albicans isolates from Burn Intensive Care Unit [BICU] in Iran. J Med Microbiol. 2015; 64(Pt 3):248 53
11. Afsarian SM, Badali H, Shokohi T, Najafipour S. Molecular diversity of Candida albicans isolated from immunocompromised patients, based on MLST Method. Iran J Public Health. 2015; 44(9):1262-9.
12. White TC, Marr KA, Bowden RA. Clinical, cellular, and molecular factors that contribute to antifungal drug resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1998; 11(2):382-402.
13. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Rare and emerging opportunistic fungal pathogens: concern for resistance beyond Candida albicans and Aspergillus fumigatus. J Clin Microbiol. 2004; 42(10):4419-31.
14. Clissold SP. Fluconzole a review of it’s pharmacodynamic and pharmaco kinietic properties and therapeutic potential in superficial on systemic mycosis. Drugs. 1990; 39:877-916.
15. Castanheira M, Messer SA, Jones RN, Farrell DJ, Pfaller MA. Activity of echinocandins and triazoles against a contemporary (2012) worldwide collection of yeast and moulds collected from invasive infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2014; 44(4):320-6.
16. Pfaller MA, Rhomberg PR, Messer SA, Jones RN, Castanheira M. Isavuconazole, micafungin, and 8 comparator antifungal agents’ susceptibility profiles for common and uncommon opportunistic fungi
collected in 2013: temporal analysis of antifungal drug resistance using CLSI species-specific clinical breakpoints and proposed epidemiological cutoff values. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015; 82(4):303-13.
17. Lotfi N, Shokohi T, Nouranibaladezaei SZ, Nasrolahi Omran A, Kondori N. High recovery rate of non-albicans Candida species isolated from burn patients with candidemia in Iran. Jundishapur J Microbiol. 2015; 8(10):e22929.
18. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts: approved standard. 3rd ed. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2008.
19. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. 4th informational supplement. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2012.
20. Zarrin M, Zarei Mahmoudabadi A. Invasive candidiasis; a review article. Jundishapur J Microbiol. 2009; 2(1):1-6.
21. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Messer SA, Hollis RJ, Jones RN. In vitro activities of caspofungin compared with those of fluconazole and itraconazole against 3,959 clinical isolates of Candida spp., including 157 fluconazole-resistant isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003; 47(3):1068-71.
22. Mora-Duarte J, Betts R, Rotstein C, Colombo AL, Thompson-Moya L, Smietana J, et al. Comparison of caspofungin and amphotericin B for invasive candidiasis. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347(25):2020-9.
23. Pujol C, Pfaller MA, Soll DR. Flucytosine resistance is restricted to a single genetic clade of Candida albicans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004; 48(1):262-6.
24. Dodgson AR, Dodgson KJ, Pujol C, Pfaller MA, Soll DR. Clade-specific flucytosine resistance is due to a single nucleotide change in the FUR1 gene of Candida albicans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004; 48(6):2223-7.
25. Fothergill AW, Sutton DA, McCarthy DI, Wiederhold NP. Impact of new antifungal breakpoints on antifungal resistance in Candida species. J Clin Microbio J Clin Microbiol. 2014; 52(3):994-7.
26. Castanheira M, Messer SA, Rhomberg PR, Dietrich RR, Jones RN, Pfaller MA. Isavuconazole and nine comparator antifungal susceptibility profiles for common and uncommon Candida species collected in 2012: application of new CLSI clinical breakpoints and epidemiological cutoff values. Mycopathologia. 2014; 178(1-2):1-9.
27. Katiraee F, Khosravi AR, Khalaj V, Hajiabdolbaghi M, Khaksar AA, Rasoulinejad M. In vitro antifungal susceptibility of oral Candida species from Iranian HIV infected patients. Tehran Univ Med Sci. 2012;
70(2):96-103.
28. Badiee P, Alborzi A, Davarpanah MA, Shakiba E. Distributions and antifungal susceptibility of Candida species from mucosal sites in HIV positive patients. Arch Iran Med. 2010; 13(4):282-7.
29. Shokohi T, Bandalizadeh Z, Hedayati MT, Mayahi S. In vitro antifungal susceptibility of Candida species isolated from oropharyngeal lesions of patients with cancer to some antifungal agents. Jundishapur J Microbiol. 2011; 4(2):S19-26.
30. Gross NT, Arias ML, Moraga M, Baddasarow Y, Jarstrand C. Species distribution and susceptibility to azoles of vaginal yeasts isolated prostitutes. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 2007:82412.
31. ElFeky DS, Gohar NM, El-Seidi EA, Ezzat MM, AboElew SH. Species identification and antifungal susceptibility pattern of Candida isolates in cases of vulvovaginal candidiasis. Alexandria J Med. 2015; 52(3):269-77.
32. Lass-Flörl C. The changing face of epidemiology of invasive fungal disease in Europe. Mycoses. 2009; 52(3):197-205.
33. Mukherjee PK, Sheehan D, Puzniak L, Schlamm H, Ghannoum MA. Echinocandins: are they all the same? J Chemother. 2011; 23(6):319-25.
34. Ellis D. Amphotericin B: spectrum and resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2002; 49(suppl 1):7-10.
35. Marr KA, White TC, van Burik JA, Bowden RA. Development of fluconazole resistance in Candida albicans causing disseminated infection in a patient undergoing marrow transplantation. Clin Infect Dis. 1997; 25(4):908-10.
36. Mori T, Matsumura M, Kanamaru Y, Miyano S, Hishikawa T, Irie S, et al. Myelofibrosis complicated by infection due to Candida albicans: emergence of resistance to antifungal agents during therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 1997; 25(6):1470-1.
Current Medical Mycology
Volume 2, Issue 2
June 2016
Pages 34-39

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 09 July 2019
  • Revise Date: 08 October 2020
  • Accept Date: 09 July 2019
  • Publish Date: 01 June 2016

Share

How to cite

Statistics