Literature DB >> 27562696

Antifungal susceptibilities of non-Aspergillus filamentous fungi causing invasive infection in Australia: support for current antifungal guideline recommendations.

Catriona L Halliday1, Sharon C-A Chen2, Sarah E Kidd3, Sebastian van Hal4, Belinda Chapman5, Christopher H Heath6, Andie Lee4, Karina J Kennedy7, Kathryn Daveson7, Tania C Sorrell8, C Orla Morrissey9, Deborah J Marriott10, Monica A Slavin11.   

Abstract

Antifungal susceptibilities of non-Aspergillus filamentous fungal pathogens cannot always be inferred from their identification. Here we determined, using the Sensititre(®) YeastOne(®) YO10 panel, the in vitro activities of nine antifungal agents against 52 clinical isolates of emergent non-Aspergillus moulds representing 17 fungal groups in Australia. Isolates comprised Mucorales (n = 14), Scedosporium/Lomentospora spp. (n = 18) and a range of hyaline hyphomycetes (n = 9) and other dematiaceous fungi (n = 11). Excluding Verruconis gallopava, echinocandins demonstrated poor activity (MICs generally >8 mg/L) against these moulds. Lomentospora prolificans (n = 4) and Fusarium spp. (n = 6) demonstrated raised MICs to all antifungal drugs tested, with the lowest being to voriconazole and amphotericin B (AmB), respectively (geometric mean MICs of 3.4 mg/L and 2.2 mg/L, respectively). All Scedosporium apiospermum complex isolates (n = 14) were inhibited by voriconazole concentrations of ≤0.25 mg/L, followed by posaconazole and itraconazole at ≤1 mg/L. Posaconazole and AmB were the most active agents against the Mucorales, with MIC90 values of 1 mg/L and 2 mg/L, respectively, for Rhizopus spp. For dematiaceous fungi, all isolates were inhibited by itraconazole and posaconazole concentrations of ≤0.5 mg/L (MIC90, 0.12 mg/L and 0.25 mg/L, respectively), but voriconazole and AmB also had in vitro activity (MIC90, 0.5 mg/L and 1 mg/L, respectively). Differences in antifungal susceptibility within species and between species within genera support the need for testing individual patient isolates to guide therapy. The Sensititre(®) YeastOne(®) offers a practical alternative to the reference methodology for susceptibility testing of moulds.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. and International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antifungal susceptibility; Non-Aspergillus moulds; Sensititre(®); YeastOne(®)

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27562696     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2016.07.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents        ISSN: 0924-8579            Impact factor:   5.283


  4 in total

Review 1.  Antifungal Susceptibility Testing: Current Approaches.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Berkow; Shawn R Lockhart; Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2020-04-29       Impact factor: 26.132

2.  Susceptibility Testing of Common and Uncommon Aspergillus Species against Posaconazole and Other Mold-Active Antifungal Azoles Using the Sensititre Method.

Authors:  Enrica Mello; Brunella Posteraro; Antonietta Vella; Elena De Carolis; Riccardo Torelli; Tiziana D'Inzeo; Paul E Verweij; Maurizio Sanguinetti
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Evaluation of a Novel Mitochondrial Pan-Mucorales Marker for the Detection, Identification, Quantification, and Growth Stage Determination of Mucormycetes.

Authors:  Rita Caramalho; Lisa Madl; Katharina Rosam; Günter Rambach; Cornelia Speth; Johannes Pallua; Thomas Larentis; Ricardo Araujo; Ana Alastruey-Izquierdo; Cornelia Lass-Flörl; Michaela Lackner
Journal:  J Fungi (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-11

Review 4.  zzm321990 Scedosporium and Lomentospora Infections: Contemporary Microbiological Tools for the Diagnosis of Invasive Disease.

Authors:  Sharon C-A Chen; Catriona L Halliday; Martin Hoenigl; Oliver A Cornely; Wieland Meyer
Journal:  J Fungi (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-04
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.