| Literature DB >> 36012859 |
Simona Fioriti1, Oscar Cirioni1,2, Oriana Simonetti3, Lucia Franca1,4, Bianca Candelaresi1,2, Francesco Pallotta1,2, Damian Neubauer5, Elzbieta Kamysz6, Wojciech Kamysz5, Benedetta Canovari4, Lucia Brescini1,2, Gianluca Morroni1, Francesco Barchiesi1,4.
Abstract
Aspergillosis, which is mainly sustained by Aspergillus fumigatus, includes a broad spectrum of diseases. They are usually severe in patients with co-morbidities. The first-line therapy includes triazoles, for which an increasing incidence of drug resistance has been lately described. As a consequence of this, the need for new and alternative antifungal molecules is absolutely necessary. As peptides represent promising antimicrobial molecules, two lipopeptides (C14-NleRR-NH2, C14-WRR-NH2) were tested to assess the antifungal activity against azole-resistant A. fumigatus. Antifungal activity was evaluated by determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs), time-kill curves, XTT assay, optical microscopy, and checkerboard combination with isavuconazole. Both lipopeptides showed antifungal activity, with MICs ranging from 8 mg/L to 16 mg/L, and a dose-dependent effect was confirmed by both time-kill curves and XTT assays. Microscopy showed that hyphae growth was hampered at concentrations equal to or higher than MICs. The rising antifungal resistance highlights the usefulness of novel compounds to treat severe fungal infections. Although further studies assessing the activity of lipopeptides are necessary, these molecules could be effective antifungal alternatives that overcome the current resistances.Entities:
Keywords: Aspergillus fumigatus; antimicrobial peptides; azole resistance; lipopeptides
Year: 2022 PMID: 36012859 PMCID: PMC9409728 DOI: 10.3390/jof8080872
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Fungi (Basel) ISSN: 2309-608X
Antifungal susceptibility profiles of isolates used.
| Strains | MIC (µg/mL) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| C14-NleRR-NH2 | C14-WRR-NH2 | Isavuconazole | |
| 8 | 8 | 8 | |
| 16 | 16 | 1 | |
Figure 1Time–kill curves of two A. fumigatus isolates. A. fumigatus SSI-5586 treated with different concentrations of C14-NleRR-NH2 (A) and C14-WRR-NH2 (B). A. fumigatus SSI-4524 treated with different concentrations of C14-NleRR-NH2 (C) and C14-WRR-NH2 (D).
Figure 2XTT assay of two isolates of A. fumigatus. A. fumigatus SSI-5586 treated with different concentrations of C14- NleRR-NH2 (A) and C14-WRR-NH2 (B). A. fumigatus SSI-4524 treated with different concentrations of C14- NleRR-NH2 (C) and C14-WRR-NH2 (D). *: p < 0.05 compared to control.
Figure 3Optical microscopy of the A. fumigatus isolates after 24 h of treatment with C14-NleRR-NH2 at different concentrations. A. fumigatus SSI-4524 untreated (A), treated with 0.5X MIC (B), 1X MIC (C), and 2X MIC (D). A. fumigatus SSI-5586 untreated (E), treated with 0.5X MIC (F), 1X MIC (G), and 2X MIC (H).
Figure 4Optical microscopy of the A. fumigatus isolates after 24 h of treatment with C14-WRR-NH2 at different concentrations. A. fumigatus SSI-4524 untreated (A), treated with 0.5X MIC (B), 1X MIC (C), and 2X MIC (D). A. fumigatus SSI-5586 untreated (E), treated with 0.5X MIC (F), 1X MIC (G), and 2X MIC (H).