| Literature DB >> 26887224 |
Raimunda S N Brilhante1, Manoel A N Paiva2, Célia M S Sampaio3, Débora S C M Castelo-Branco4, Carlos E C Teixeira4, Lucas P de Alencar2, Tereza J P G Bandeira5, André J Monteiro6, Rossana A Cordeiro4, Waldemiro A Pereira-Neto4, José J C Sidrim4, José L B Moreira4, Marcos F G Rocha2.
Abstract
Since, there is no study reporting the mechanism of azole resistance among yeasts isolated from aquatic environments; the present study aims to investigate the occurrence of antifungal resistance among yeasts isolated from an aquatic environment, and assess the efflux-pump activity of the azole-resistant strains to better understand the mechanism of resistance for this group of drugs. For this purpose, monthly water and sediment samples were collected from Catú Lake, Ceará, Brazil, from March 2011 to February 2012. The obtained yeasts were identified based on morphological and biochemical characteristics. Of the 46 isolates, 37 were Candida spp., 4 were Trichosporon asahii, 3 were Cryptococcus laurentii, 1 Rhodotorula mucilaginosa, and 1 was Kodamaea ohmeri. These isolates were subjected to broth microdilution assay with amphotericin B, itraconazole, and fluconazole, according to the methodology standardized by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of amphotericin B, itraconazole, and fluconazole were 0.03125-2μg/mL, 0.0625 to ≥16μg/mL, and 0.5 to ≥64μg/mL, respectively, and 13 resistant azole-resistant Candida isolates were detected. A reduction in the azole MICs leading to the phenotypical reversal of the azole resistance was observed upon addition of efflux-pump inhibitors. These findings suggest that the azole resistance among environmental Candida spp. is most likely associated with the overexpression of efflux-pumps.Entities:
Keywords: Antifungal resistance; Aquatic environments; Candida spp.; Yeast microbiota
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26887224 PMCID: PMC4822745 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjm.2015.11.008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Microbiol ISSN: 1517-8382 Impact factor: 2.476
Fig. 1The sample collection points: Catú Lake, Aquiraz, Ceará, Brazil. Point 1: Leisure area: bars, restaurants, boats. The area is used for activities such as boating and jet skiing (3°55′59.79″ S and 38°21′50.10″ W). Point 2: Agricultural area with potato and bean fields, with possible use of azoles (3°55′47.25″ S and 38°22′14.16″ W). Point 3: Industrial area, near the state highway (CE-040). (3°56′03.70″ S and 38°22′25.15″ W). Point 4: Residential area, discharge of raw household sewage, near the confluence with the Catú River. 3°56′56.72″ S and 38°22′31.57″ W.
Yeast species isolated from different collection points at Catú Lake.
| Yeast species | Collection points | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surface/bottom water | |||||
| Point 1 | Point 2 | Point 3 | Point 4 | Total | |
| 0/0 | 0/0 | 0/1(2.1%) | 0/0 | 1(2.1%) | |
| 1(2.1%)/0 | 0/1(2.1%) | 0/0 | 1(2.1%)/0 | 3(6.5%) | |
| 1(2.1%)/1(2.1%) | 0/0 | 1(2.1%)/0 | 0/2(4.3%) | 5(10.8%) | |
| 1(2.1%)/0 | 2(4.3%)/1(2.1%) | 0/1(2.1%) | 4(8.6)/1(2.1%) | 10(21.7%) | |
| 3(6.5%)/1(2.1%) | 4(8.6%)/0 | 2 (4.3%)/2(4.3%) | 4 (8.6%)/2 (4.3%) | 18(39.1%) | |
| 0/1(2.1%) | 0/0 | 1(2.1%)/0 | 0/1(2.1%) | 3(6.5%) | |
| 0/0 | 1(2.1%)/0 | 0/0 | 0/0 | 1(1.8%) | |
| 0/0 | 1(2.1%)/0 | 0/0 | 0/0 | 1(3.5%) | |
| 0/0 | 0/0 | 0/0 | 2(4.3%)/2(4.3%) | 4(8.6%) | |
| Total | 6(13%)/3(6.5%) | 8(14%)/2 (4.3%) | 4(8.6%)/4(8.6%) | 11(23.4%)/8(14%) | 46(100%) |
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of amphotericin B, itraconazole and fluconazole against 46 yeast isolates from Catú Lake.
| Species | Minimum inhibitory concentrations (μg/mL) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amphotericin B | Fluconazole | Itraconazole | ||
| 18 | 1 (2) | 64 (4) | 4 (2) | |
| 0.5 (4) | 32 (4) | 2 (1) | ||
| 0.25 (2) | 16 (7) | 1 (1) | ||
| 0.125 (5) | 2 (3) | 0.25 (3) | ||
| 0.0625 (4) | 0.125 (3) | |||
| 0.03215 (1) | 0.0625 (8) | |||
| 10 | 2 (2) | 500 (1) | 32 (1) | |
| 1 (3) | 64 (1) | 16 (4) | ||
| 0.5 (4) | 32 (1) | 0.25 (1) | ||
| 0.125 (1) | 16 (1) | 0.125 (3) | ||
| 4 (1) | 0.0625 (1) | |||
| 2 (3) | ||||
| 1 (2) | ||||
| 3 | 1 (3) | 2 (1) | 0.5 (1) | |
| 1 (2) | 0.125 (2) | |||
| 1 | 1 | 250 | 32 | |
| 5 | 1 (2) | 64 (1) | 16 (1) | |
| 0.5 (2) | 32 (1) | 1 (1) | ||
| 0.125 (2) | 4 (1) | 0.125 (2) | ||
| 2 (1) | 0.0625 (1) | |||
| 0.5 (1) | ||||
| 1 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.125 | |
| 3 | 0.5 (3) | 2 (2) | 0.125 (1) | |
| 4 (1) | 0.5 (2) | |||
| 1 | 0.0625 | 0.25 | 0.03125 | |
| 4 | 0.125 (1) | 0.5 (2) | 0.125 (1) | |
| 0.0625 (3) | 0.25 (2) | 0.0625 (2) | ||
| 0.03125 (1) | ||||
The numbers of isolates for each MIC indicated.
Strains tested with efflux pump inhibitors.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of fluconazole and itraconazole after a combination with efflux pump inhibitors against the resistant yeast isolates from Catú Lake.
| Species | Minimum inhibitory concentrations (μg/mL) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Fluconazole + promethazine | Fluconazole + haloperidol | Itraconazole + promethazine | |
| 4 (1) | 2 (2) | 0.125 (1) | |
| 2 (3) | 1 (2) | 0.0625 (3) | |
| 8 (1) | 4 (1) | 0.25 (2) | |
| 2 (1) | 2 (1) | 0.125 (2) | |
| 0.0625 (1) | |||
| 8 | 2 | 0.25 | |
| 8 | 2 | 0.125 (2) | |
The number of isolates for each MIC indicated.