Resistance Candida spp. for amphotericin B in cancer patients
Abstract
We have tested 253 strains (13 species) Candida spp. Determination of the minimum inhibitory concentration of amphotericin B was performed by 2 methods: epsilometric method (Etest®, BioMerieux, France) and on the instrument the Vitek2 (BioMerieux, France). In general, resistance was detected in 5 strains (2.1%) (C. parapsilosis – 4, C. tropicalis – 1). There were no resistance to amphotericin B among strains of C. albicans, C. glabrata and C.krusei. Coincidence evaluation results of the minimum inhibitory concentration of amphotericin B for categories sensitivity/resistance when tested strains 2 methods generally occurred in 98% of cases (248 of 253): 100% for the species C. albicans, C. glabrata and C.krusei, 92.2% for C. parapsilosis and 95% for C. tropicalis. The results of our study demonstrate a low degree of resistance of Candida spp. to amphotericin B, which allows the use of the drug in a
About the Authors
N. S. BagirovaRussian Federation
N. V. Dmitrieva
Russian Federation
References
1. Marchetti O., C. Cordonnier., T. Calandra. EJC, Guidelines from the first European Conference on Infections in Leukemia: ECIL1., Eur J Cancer Suppl 2007; 5(2): 32-42
2. Kriengkauykiat J., J. I. Ito, S. S. Dadwai, Epidemiology and treatment approaches in management of invasive fungal infections. Review. Clinical Epidemiology 2011; 3: 175-191
3. Maiken Cavling Arendrup. Candida and Candidaemia. Susceptibility and Epidemiology. Dan Med J 2013; 60(11):B4698
4. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. 2012. Progress in antifungal susceptibility testing of Candida spp. by use of Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute broth microdilution methods, 2010 to 2012. J. Clin. Microbiol. 50:2846–2856
5. Pfaller M.A., Shawn A. Messer, Leah N. Woosley, Ronald N. Jones, Mariana Castanheira. Echinocandin and Triazole Antifungal Susceptibility Profiles for Clinical Opportunistic Yeast and Mold Isolates Collected from 2010 to 2011: Application of New CLSI Clinical Breakpoints and Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Characterization of Geographic and Temporal Trends of Antifungal Resistance. August 2013 Volume 51 Number 8 Journal of Clinical Microbiology p.2571–2581
6. Espinel-Ingroff A., M. A. Pfaller, B. Bustamante, E. Canton, A. Fothergill, J. Fuller, G. M. Gonzalez, C. Lass-Flцrl, S. R. Lockhart, E. Martin-Mazuelos, J. F. Meis, M. S. C. Melhem, L. Ostrosky-Zeichner, T. Pelaez, M. W. Szeszs, G. St-Germain, L. X. Bonfietti, J. Guarro, J. Turnidge. Multilaboratory Study of Epidemiological Cutoff Values for Detection of Resistance in Eight Candida Species to Fluconazole, Posaconazole, and Voriconazole. Antimicrob. Agents and Chemother. April 2014, Volume 58, Number 4, p. 2006–2012
7. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. 2012. Progress in antifungal susceptibility testing of Candida spp. by use of Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute broth microdilution methods, 2010 to 2012. J. Clin. Microbiol. 50:2846–2856
8. Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA. 2012. Utility of antifungal susceptibility testing and clinical correlations, p 131. In Hall GS (ed), Interactions of yeasts, moulds, and antifungal agents: how to detect resistance. Springer, New York, NY
9. Rex JH, Pfaller MA. 2002. Has antifungal susceptibility testing come of age? Clin. Infect. Dis. 35:982–989
10. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs. Version 8.0, valid from 2015-11-16. http://mic.eucast.org
11. Cuenca-Estrella M., A. Gomez-Lopez, A. Alastruey-Izquierdo, L. Bernal-Martinez, I. Cuesta, M.J. Buitrago, and J.L. Rodriguez-Tudela. Comparison of the VITEK 2 Antifungal Susceptibility System with the CLSI and the EUCAST Broth Microdilution Reference methods and with the Sensititre Yeast-One and the Etest Techniques for the Detection in Vitro of Antifungal Resistance in Yeasts. J. Clin. Microbiol., May 2010, Vol. 48, No. 5, p. 1782–1786
12. Ranque S., L. Lachaud, M. Gari-Toussaint, A. Michel-Nguyen, M. Malliй, J. Gaudart, and S. Bertout. Interlaboratory Reproducibility of Etest Amphotericin B and Caspofungin Yeast Susceptibility Testing and Comparison with the CLSI Method. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2012, 50(7):2305
13. Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Bolmstrom A. 1998. Evaluation of Etest for determining in vitro susceptibility of yeast isolates to amphotericin B. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 32:223–227
14. Krogh-Madsen M, Arendrup MC, Heslet L, Knudsen JD. 2006. Amphotericin B and caspofungin resistance in Candida glabrata isolates recovered from a critically ill patient. Clin. Infect. Dis. 42:938–944
15. Bagirova N.S., N.V. Dmitrieva. Opredelenie rezistentnosti Candida spp. k antifungal’nym preparatam sistemnogo dejstvija jepsilometricheskim metodom (E-test) s uchetom vido-specificheskih osobennostej kandid. «Zhurnal Infektologii» 2015; tom 7 №3, 91-102
16. M. Cuenca-Estrella, D. Rodriguez, B. Almirante et al., “In vitro susceptibilities of bloodstream isolates of Candida species to six antifungal agents: results from a population-based active surveillance programme, Barcelona, Spain, 2002-2003,” Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 194–199, 2005
17. N. Kiraz, Z. Erturan, M. Uzun et al., “Susceptibility of 300 Candida albicans strains to amphotericin B, flucytosine, fluconazole ve mikonazole,” Klimik Dergisi, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 116–118, 1998
18. M. Cuenca-Estrella, L. Rodero, G. Garc´ıa-Effr´on, and J. L. Rodriguez-Tudela, “Antifungal susceptibilities of Candida spp. isolated from blood in Spain and Argentina, 1996–1999,” Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 981–987, 2002
19. D. J. Diekema, S. A. Messer, A. B. Brueggemann et al., “Epidemiology of candidemia: 3-Year results from the emerging infections and the epidemiology of Iowa organisms study,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 1298–1302, 2002
Review
For citations:
Bagirova N.S., Dmitrieva N.V. Resistance Candida spp. for amphotericin B in cancer patients. Journal Infectology. 2016;8(1):26-31. (In Russ.)