Literature DB >> 24334863

In vitro susceptibility of Malassezia pachydermatis isolates from canine skin with atopic dermatitis to ketoconazole and itraconazole in East Asia.

Shion Watanabe1, Anna Koike, Rui Kano, Masahiko Nagata, Charles Chen, Cheol-Yong Hwang, Atsuhiko Hasegawa, Hiroshi Kamata.   

Abstract

Topical or oral azole antifungals are commonly used in canine atopic dermatitis (AD), as the lipophilic yeast Malassezia pachydermatis exacerbates canine AD. To examine whether canine AD lesions harbor azole-resistant M. pachydermatis isolates in East Asia, we investigated the in vitro susceptibility of M. pachydermatis isolates to ketoconazole (KTZ) and itraconazole (ITZ) obtained from AD lesions of canines in Japan, Korea and Taiwan. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of KTZ and ITZ were measured by the E-test using Sabouraud dextrose agar with 0.5% Tween 40. The MICs of KTZ and ITZ for isolates from canines with AD were significantly higher than the MICs for isolates from healthy canines. Our findings suggested that the clinical isolates from canine AD skin lesions were less susceptible to azoles than those from normal canine skin in East Asia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24334863      PMCID: PMC4064146          DOI: 10.1292/jvms.13-0433

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vet Med Sci        ISSN: 0916-7250            Impact factor:   1.267


Canine atopic dermatitis (AD) is frequently treated with topical or oral azole antifungals, as the lipophilic yeast Malassezia pachydermatis is recognized as an exacerbating factor of canine AD [6, 8]. Previously, we reported that a clinical isolate of M. pachydermatis was resistant to itraconazole [9]. Cafarchia et al. in Italy reported that clinical isolates of M. pachydermatis from canine skin lesions had low susceptibility to azoles compared with those from normal canine skin [1]. We are anxious about the phenomenon worldwide, because we frequently use azoles in shampoo therapy for canine AD. To confirm these observations, we investigated the susceptibility of M. pachydermatis isolates obtained from canine AD skin lesions in East Asia to azoles. Specifically, to test the hypothesis that canine AD lesions harbor azole-resistant M. pachydermatis isolates, the in vitro susceptibility of M. pachydermatis isolates from AD skin lesions of canines in Japan, Taiwan and Korea was examined in a two-year period between 2010 and 2011. This is the first epidemiological investigation for in vitro susceptibility of M. pachydermatis in East Asia. Seventy-two isolates of M. pachydermatis were obtained from 24 healthy dogs (three isolates from each dog in Japan) with no skin disease. On the other hand, 110 isolates were obtained from 42 dogs (25 isolates from 11 dogs in Japan, 22 isolates from 11 dogs in Korea and 63 isolates from 20 dogs in Taiwan) with AD lesions. The diagnosis of atopic dermatitis was made according to the criteria described by Miller et al. and Olivry et al. [6, 10], and all affected dogs had typical lesions with greasy or waxy exudates. Each sample was collected from at least two to three areas of the external ear, paw and abdomen and cultured on CHROMagar Malassezia medium (CHROMagar, Paris, France) [4]. Morphological examination and molecular identification of M. pachydermatis were performed as described by previous reports [3, 5]. Stock inoculum suspensions were prepared from 7-day-old cultures grown on modified Dixon’s agar (3.6% malt extract, 0.6% peptone, 2.0% desiccated ox bile, 1.0% Tween 40, 0.2% glycerol, 0.2% oleic acid and 1.2% agar, pH 6.0) [3] at 32°C. The final concentration of the stock inoculum suspensions was adjusted spectrophotometrically to the optical density of 1.0 (OD 530 nm) in sterile 0.9% saline. The in vitro activity of KTZ and ITZ against clinical isolates of M. pachydermatis was investigated by the E-test. E-test gradient strips for ITZ and KTZ were obtained from AB BIODISK (Solna, Sweden). The E-test was performed according to the manufacturer’s instructions using 20 ml Sabouraud dextrose agar (1% peptone, 2% dextrose and 2% agar) with 0.5% of Tween 40 in 90-mm Petri plates. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined after a 72-hr incubation at 32°C. The E-test MIC was determined three times for each isolate. For quality control, the strain Candida parapsilosis ATCC 22019 strain was used in each experiment to check the accuracy of drug dilution (Customer Information Sheet CIS005 AB BIODISK 2004-01, AB BIODISK). The E-test MIC was deemed to be the lowest drug concentration at which the border of the elliptical inhibition zone intercepted the scale on the antifungal strip. Each isolate was tested three times on separate occasions. The MICs of the two drugs for isolates from normal and AD skin were compared using the Sidak multiple comparison procedure (Microsoft Excel 2010, Tokyo, Japan). The MICs of KTZ and ITZ for the 72 isolates of M. pachydermatis from healthy dogs and 110 isolates from AD-afflicted dogs are shown in Tables 1 and 2. The MICs of KTZ and ITZ for isolates from canines with AD were significantly higher than the MICs for isolates from healthy canines (P<0.05).
Table 1.

Ketoconazole MICs (µg/ml) for isolates of M. pachydermatis

Healthy dogs, JapanAD, JapanAD, KoreaAD, Taiwan
Range0.019–0.1250.016–210.058–30.048–8
MIC500.0940.380.331.3
MIC900.1255.21.64.21
MICm (SD)0.09 (0.036)1.35 (2.45)0.722 (1.03)1.9 (1.77)
SSDP<0.05P<0.05P<0.05

MIC mean (MICm) and standard deviation (SD) values are also shown. Statistically significant difference (SSD) indicates that the normal group was compared with each AD group using the Sidak multiple comparison procedure.

Table 2.

Itraconazole MICs (µg/ml) for isolates of M. pachydermatis

Healthy dogs, JapanAD, JapanAD, KoreaAD, Taiwan
Range0.012–0.1250.032–160.034–150.031–21
MIC500.0470.50.271.6
MIC900.11937.095.36
MICm (SD)0.059 (0.033)3.12(4.46)2.53(5.53)2.75(3.94)
SSDP<0.05P<0.05P<0.05

MIC mean (MICm) and standard deviation (SD) values are also shown. Statistically significant difference (SSD) indicates that the normal group was compared with each AD group using the Sidak multiple comparison procedure.

MIC mean (MICm) and standard deviation (SD) values are also shown. Statistically significant difference (SSD) indicates that the normal group was compared with each AD group using the Sidak multiple comparison procedure. MIC mean (MICm) and standard deviation (SD) values are also shown. Statistically significant difference (SSD) indicates that the normal group was compared with each AD group using the Sidak multiple comparison procedure. Differences in the MICs of two drugs for isolates from each AD group were assessed with the Sidak multiple comparison procedure (Microsoft Office Excel 2010). No significant differences in MICs were identified for isolates between the AD groups. Our findings are similar to those of Cafarchia et al. [1], who observed that the clinical isolates from canine skin lesions were less susceptible to azoles than those from normal canine skin, suggesting that the phenomenon may also be seen in East Asia. This phenomenon might occur worldwide. The MIC ranges for 50% inhibition (MIC50) and 90% inhibition (MIC90) of clinical isolates obtained by the modified CLSI M27-A2 test and the E-test were different (Tables 1 and 2) [1]. We suspected that the extent of resistance of Asian clinical isolates had progressed farther than that of Italian clinical isolates. Unfortunately, the treatment history of each canine with AD from which the samples were obtained was not available. Due to the fact that Malassezia is considered to be an exacerbating factor of canine AD, we expect that many of the cases of canine AD were treated with either oral or topical azoles. Resistance of fungi to azoles may be caused by such things as by alterations in sterol biosynthesis, by mutations in the drug target enzyme, sterol 14α-demethylase, which lowers its affinity for the azole, by increased expression of the ERG11 gene encoding for this enzyme or by overexpression of genes coding for membrane transport proteins of the ABC transporter (CDR1/CDR2) or the major facilitator (MDR1) superfamilies [7]. These mutations and overexpression of genes can be advantaged by long time azole therapy. Therefore, low susceptibility of M. pachydermatis to azoles is also speculated to result from the mutation of ERG11 or increasing over expression of the drug resistance genes. Future investigation on sequencing and expression of these genes is required to understand the drug resistance mechanisms of M. pachydermatis. The E-test is readily available and is a relatively easy method of determining the susceptibility of yeasts and molds to antifungals [2]. However, the breakpoints (µg/ml) for antifungal drugs for the test were not available from the manufacturer. A future study is required to define the breakpoints (µg/ml) of KTZ and ITZ using the E-test for the treatment of M. pachydermatis-associated diseases and to examine the mechanism of drug resistance of this yeast.
  9 in total

1.  Treatment of canine atopic dermatitis: 2010 clinical practice guidelines from the International Task Force on Canine Atopic Dermatitis.

Authors:  Thierry Olivry; Douglas J DeBoer; Claude Favrot; Hilary A Jackson; Ralf S Mueller; Tim Nuttall; Pascal Prélaud
Journal:  Vet Dermatol       Date:  2010-04-23       Impact factor: 1.589

2.  An azole-resistant isolate of Malassezia pachydermatis.

Authors:  Misako Nijima; Rui Kano; Masahiko Nagata; Atsuhiko Hasegawa; Hiroshi Kamata
Journal:  Vet Microbiol       Date:  2010-10-21       Impact factor: 3.293

Review 3.  Evidence-based veterinary dermatology: a systematic review of interventions for Malassezia dermatitis in dogs.

Authors:  Amélie Negre; Emmanuel Bensignor; Jacques Guillot
Journal:  Vet Dermatol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 1.589

4.  Confirmation of the nomenclatural status of Malassezia pachydermatis.

Authors:  J Guillot; E Guého; R Chermette
Journal:  Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.271

5.  In vitro antifungal susceptibility of Malassezia pachydermatis from dogs with and without skin lesions.

Authors:  Claudia Cafarchia; Luciana A Figueredo; Roberta Iatta; Maria Teresa Montagna; Domenico Otranto
Journal:  Vet Microbiol       Date:  2011-09-12       Impact factor: 3.293

6.  Genotyping of Malassezia pachydermatis isolates from canine healthy skin and atopic dermatitis by internal spacer 1 (IGS1) region analysis.

Authors:  Tetsuya Kobayashi; Rui Kano; Masahiko Nagata; Atsuhiko Hasegawa; Hiroshi Kamata
Journal:  Vet Dermatol       Date:  2011-03-14       Impact factor: 1.589

Review 7.  Trends in antifungal susceptibility testing using CLSI reference and commercial methods.

Authors:  Emilia Cantón; Ana Espinel-Ingroff; Javier Pemán
Journal:  Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 5.091

8.  Revised culture-based system for identification of Malassezia species.

Authors:  Takamasa Kaneko; Koichi Makimura; Michiko Abe; Ryoko Shiota; Yuka Nakamura; Rui Kano; Atsuhiko Hasegawa; Takashi Sugita; Shuichi Shibuya; Shinichi Watanabe; Hideyo Yamaguchi; Shigeru Abe; Noboru Okamura
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-09-19       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 9.  The genetic basis of fluconazole resistance development in Candida albicans.

Authors:  Joachim Morschhäuser
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2002-07-18
  9 in total
  8 in total

1.  In Vitro Azole and Amphotericin B Susceptibilities of Malassezia furfur from Bloodstream Infections Using E-Test and CLSI Broth Microdilution Methods.

Authors:  Wafa Rhimi; Chioma Inyang Aneke; Adriana Mosca; Domenico Otranto; Claudia Cafarchia
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2020-06-26

Review 2.  Malassezia Yeasts in Veterinary Dermatology: An Updated Overview.

Authors:  Jacques Guillot; Ross Bond
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 5.293

3.  Susceptibility of Malassezia pachydermatis Clinical Isolates to Allopathic Antifungals and Brazilian Red, Green, and Brown Propolis Extracts.

Authors:  Kathleen Ramos Deegan; Maisa Santos Fonseca; Diogo Coelho Pádua Oliveira; Laerte Marlon Santos; Clara Couto Fernandez; Samira Abdallah Hanna; Bruna Aparecida Souza Machado; Marcelo Andrés Umsza-Guez; Roberto Meyer; Ricardo Wagner Portela
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2019-12-13

Review 4.  Malassezia: Zoonotic Implications, Parallels and Differences in Colonization and Disease in Humans and Animals.

Authors:  Stefan Hobi; Claudia Cafarchia; Valentina Romano; Vanessa R Barrs
Journal:  J Fungi (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-04

Review 5.  The Role of Malassezia spp. in Atopic Dermatitis.

Authors:  Martin Glatz; Philipp P Bosshard; Wolfram Hoetzenecker; Peter Schmid-Grendelmeier
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2015-05-29       Impact factor: 4.241

6.  Exploration of anti-Malassezia potential of Nyctanthes arbor-tristis L. and their application to combat the infection caused by Mala s1 a novel allergen.

Authors:  Rohit K Mishra; Vani Mishra; Anand Pandey; Amit K Tiwari; Himanshu Pandey; Shivesh Sharma; Avinash C Pandey; Anupam Dikshit
Journal:  BMC Complement Altern Med       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 3.659

Review 7.  Methodological Issues in Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Malassezia pachydermatis.

Authors:  Andrea Peano; Mario Pasquetti; Paolo Tizzani; Elisa Chiavassa; Jacques Guillot; Elizabeth Johnson
Journal:  J Fungi (Basel)       Date:  2017-07-05

8.  A Ketoconazole Susceptibility Test for Malassezia pachydermatis Using Modified Leeming⁻Notman Agar.

Authors:  Bo-Young Hsieh; Wei-Hsun Chao; Yi-Jing Xue; Jyh-Mirn Lai
Journal:  J Fungi (Basel)       Date:  2018-11-16
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.