N Venkatesh Prajna1, Prajna Lalitha1, Revathi Rajaraman1, Tiruvengada Krishnan1, Anita Raghavan1, Muthiah Srinivasan1, Kieran S O'Brien2, Michael Zegans3, Stephen D McLeod4, Nisha R Acharya5, Jeremy D Keenan6, Thomas M Lietman5, Jennifer Rose-Nussbaumer7. 1. Aravind Eye Care System at Madurai, Pondicherry, and Coimbatore, India. 2. Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco. 5. Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco4Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco5Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco. 6. Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco4Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco. 7. Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco4Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco6Department of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The development of multiple triazole resistance in pathogenic filamentous fungi has become an increasing clinical concern and has been shown to increase the risk for treatment failure. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether antifungal resistance increased during the Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trial I (MUTT I), as measured by minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) in baseline cultures. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This secondary analysis of a double-masked, multicenter, randomized clinical trial included patients with culture- or smear-positive filamentous fungal corneal ulcer and a baseline visual acuity of 20/40 to 20/400. Culture-positive samples with susceptibility testing were included in this analysis. The patients were treated at multiple locations of the Aravind Eye Care Hospital system in South India. Data were collected from April 3, 2010, to December 31, 2011, and analyzed from July 15 to September 1, 2015. INTERVENTIONS: Corneal smears and cultures were obtained from all study participants at baseline. Susceptibility testing was performed for each culture-positive specimen. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Minimum inhibitory concentration of voriconazole and natamycin in baseline cultures. RESULTS: Of 323 participants with smear-positive specimens (183 men [56.7%]; 140 women [43.3%]; median [interquartile range] age, 47 [38-56] years), fungal-positive cultures were obtained for 256 (79.3%). The MIC data were available for 221 of 323 participants (68.4%), because 35 samples had no growth during susceptibility testing. A 2.14-fold increase per year (95% CI, 1.13-4.56; P = .02) in voriconazole MICs after controlling for the infectious organism was found. This association was not found when looking at natamycin MICs of baseline cultures after controlling for the infectious organism (1.26; 95% CI, 0.13-12.55; P = .85). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Susceptibility to voriconazole appeared to decrease during the relatively short enrollment period of the clinical trial. This decrease may be more related to increased resistance of environmental fungi rather than previous treatment with azoles, because presenting with azole treatment was not a risk factor for resistance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00996736.
RCT Entities:
IMPORTANCE: The development of multiple triazole resistance in pathogenic filamentous fungi has become an increasing clinical concern and has been shown to increase the risk for treatment failure. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether antifungal resistance increased during the Mycotic Ulcer Treatment Trial I (MUTT I), as measured by minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) in baseline cultures. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This secondary analysis of a double-masked, multicenter, randomized clinical trial included patients with culture- or smear-positive filamentous fungal corneal ulcer and a baseline visual acuity of 20/40 to 20/400. Culture-positive samples with susceptibility testing were included in this analysis. The patients were treated at multiple locations of the Aravind Eye Care Hospital system in South India. Data were collected from April 3, 2010, to December 31, 2011, and analyzed from July 15 to September 1, 2015. INTERVENTIONS: Corneal smears and cultures were obtained from all study participants at baseline. Susceptibility testing was performed for each culture-positive specimen. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Minimum inhibitory concentration of voriconazole and natamycin in baseline cultures. RESULTS: Of 323 participants with smear-positive specimens (183 men [56.7%]; 140 women [43.3%]; median [interquartile range] age, 47 [38-56] years), fungal-positive cultures were obtained for 256 (79.3%). The MIC data were available for 221 of 323 participants (68.4%), because 35 samples had no growth during susceptibility testing. A 2.14-fold increase per year (95% CI, 1.13-4.56; P = .02) in voriconazole MICs after controlling for the infectious organism was found. This association was not found when looking at natamycin MICs of baseline cultures after controlling for the infectious organism (1.26; 95% CI, 0.13-12.55; P = .85). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Susceptibility to voriconazole appeared to decrease during the relatively short enrollment period of the clinical trial. This decrease may be more related to increased resistance of environmental fungi rather than previous treatment with azoles, because presenting with azole treatment was not a risk factor for resistance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00996736.
Authors: Niki I Paphitou; Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner; Victor L Paetznick; Jose R Rodriguez; Enuo Chen; John H Rex Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Prajna Lalitha; N Venkatesh Prajna; Catherine E Oldenburg; Muthiah Srinivasan; Tiruvengada Krishnan; Jeena Mascarenhas; C M Vaitilingam; Stephen D McLeod; Michael E Zegans; Travis C Porco; Nisha R Acharya; Thomas M Lietman Journal: Cornea Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 2.651
Authors: Catherine Q Sun; Prajna Lalitha; N Venkatesh Prajna; Rajarathinam Karpagam; Manoharan Geetha; Kieran S O'Brien; Catherine E Oldenburg; Kathryn J Ray; Stephen D McLeod; Nisha R Acharya; Thomas M Lietman Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Eveline Snelders; Robert A G Huis In 't Veld; Anthonius J M M Rijs; Gert H J Kema; Willem J G Melchers; Paul E Verweij Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2009-04-17 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: Lawson Ung; Paulo J M Bispo; Swapna S Shanbhag; Michael S Gilmore; James Chodosh Journal: Surv Ophthalmol Date: 2018-12-24 Impact factor: 6.048
Authors: Darren Shu Jeng Ting; Charlotte Shan Ho; Rashmi Deshmukh; Dalia G Said; Harminder S Dua Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2021-01-07 Impact factor: 3.775