Maiken C Arendrup1, David S Perlin. 1. aUnit of Mycology, Department of Microbiology and Infection Control, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark bPublic Health Research Institute, Rutgers-New Jersey Medical School, New Jersey, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Echinocandin resistance in Candida is a great concern, as the echinocandin drugs are recommended as first-line therapy for patients with invasive candidiasis. Here, we review recent advances in our understanding of the epidemiology, underlying mechanisms, methods for detection and clinical implications. RECENT FINDINGS: Echinocandin resistance has emerged over the recent years. It has been found in most clinically relevant Candida spp., but is most common in C. glabrata with rates exceeding 10% at selected institutions. It is most commonly detected after 3-4 weeks of treatment and is associated with a dismal outcome. An extensive list of mutations in hot spot regions of the genes encoding the target has been characterized and associated with species and drug-specific loss of susceptibility. The updated antifungal susceptibility testing reference methods identify echinocandin-resistant isolates reliably, although the performance of commercial tests is somewhat more variable. Alternative technologies are being developed, including molecular detection and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight. SUMMARY: Echinocandin resistance is increasingly encountered and its occurrence makes susceptibility testing essential, particularly in patients with prior exposure. The further development of rapid and user-friendly commercially available susceptibility platforms is warranted. Antifungal stewardship is important in order to minimize unnecessary selection pressure.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Echinocandin resistance in Candida is a great concern, as the echinocandin drugs are recommended as first-line therapy for patients with invasive candidiasis. Here, we review recent advances in our understanding of the epidemiology, underlying mechanisms, methods for detection and clinical implications. RECENT FINDINGS:Echinocandin resistance has emerged over the recent years. It has been found in most clinically relevant Candida spp., but is most common in C. glabrata with rates exceeding 10% at selected institutions. It is most commonly detected after 3-4 weeks of treatment and is associated with a dismal outcome. An extensive list of mutations in hot spot regions of the genes encoding the target has been characterized and associated with species and drug-specific loss of susceptibility. The updated antifungal susceptibility testing reference methods identify echinocandin-resistant isolates reliably, although the performance of commercial tests is somewhat more variable. Alternative technologies are being developed, including molecular detection and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight. SUMMARY:Echinocandin resistance is increasingly encountered and its occurrence makes susceptibility testing essential, particularly in patients with prior exposure. The further development of rapid and user-friendly commercially available susceptibility platforms is warranted. Antifungal stewardship is important in order to minimize unnecessary selection pressure.
Authors: Gregory A Eschenauer; M Hong Nguyen; Shmuel Shoham; Jose A Vazquez; Arthur J Morris; William A Pasculle; Christine J Kubin; Kenneth P Klinker; Peggy L Carver; Kimberly E Hanson; Sharon Chen; Simon W Lam; Brian A Potoski; Lloyd G Clarke; Ryan K Shields; Cornelius J Clancy Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-01-06 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Michael A Pfaller; Shawn A Messer; Daniel J Diekema; Ronald N Jones; Mariana Castanheira Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Maiken C Arendrup; Manuel Cuenca-Estrella; Cornelia Lass-Flörl; William W Hope Journal: Drug Resist Updat Date: 2014-01-27 Impact factor: 18.500
Authors: Jose Vazquez; Annette C Reboli; Peter G Pappas; Thomas F Patterson; John Reinhardt; Peter Chin-Hong; Ellis Tobin; Daniel H Kett; Pinaki Biswas; Robert Swanson Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2014-02-21 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: C Arens; M Bernhard; C Koch; A Heininger; D Störzinger; T Hoppe-Tichy; M Hecker; B Grabein; M A Weigand; C Lichtenstern Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Pilar Escribano; Jesús Guinea; María Ángeles Bordallo-Cardona; Laura Judith Marcos-Zambrano; Carlos Sánchez-Carrillo; Elia Gómez G de la Pedrosa; Rafael Cantón; Emilio Bouza Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2018-02-23 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Marie von Lilienfeld-Toal; Johannes Wagener; Hermann Einsele; Oliver A Cornely; Oliver Kurzai Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2019-04-19 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Kelley R Healey; Krishna K Challa; Thomas D Edlind; Santosh K Katiyar Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: A Espinel-Ingroff; M Alvarez-Fernandez; E Cantón; P L Carver; S C-A Chen; G Eschenauer; D L Getsinger; G M Gonzalez; N P Govender; A Grancini; K E Hanson; S E Kidd; K Klinker; C J Kubin; J V Kus; S R Lockhart; J Meletiadis; A J Morris; T Pelaez; G Quindós; M Rodriguez-Iglesias; F Sánchez-Reus; S Shoham; N L Wengenack; N Borrell Solé; J Echeverria; J Esperalba; E Gómez-G de la Pedrosa; I García García; M J Linares; F Marco; P Merino; J Pemán; L Pérez Del Molino; E Roselló Mayans; C Rubio Calvo; M Ruiz Pérez de Pipaon; G Yagüe; G Garcia-Effron; J Guinea; D S Perlin; M Sanguinetti; R Shields; J Turnidge Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2015-08-17 Impact factor: 5.191