scholarly journals Species Identification and Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Candida Bloodstream Isolates from Population-Based Surveillance Studies in Two U.S. Cities from 2008 to 2011

2012 ◽  
Vol 50 (11) ◽  
pp. 3435-3442 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. R. Lockhart ◽  
N. Iqbal ◽  
A. A. Cleveland ◽  
M. M. Farley ◽  
L. H. Harrison ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Amir Arastehfar ◽  
Samira Yazdanpanah ◽  
Mina Bakhtiari ◽  
Wenjie Fang ◽  
Weihua Pan ◽  
...  

Abstract Systematic candidemia studies, especially in southern Iran, are scarce. In the current prospective study, we investigated candidemia in three major healthcare centers of Shiraz, the largest city in southern Iran. Yeast isolates from blood and other sterile body fluids were identified by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry and subjected to antifungal susceptibility testing (AFST) using the broth microdilution method. Clinical data were retrieved from patients’ medical records. In total, 113 yeast isolates were recovered from 109 patients, over 60% of whom received fluconazole. Antifungal drugs were prescribed without considering species identification or AFST. The all-cause mortality rate was 28%. Almost 30% of the patients were from intensive care units (ICUs). Candida albicans (56/113; 49.5%) was the most prevalent species followed by C. glabrata (26/113; 23%), C. parapsilosis (13/113; 11.5%), C. tropicalis (7/113; 6.2%), and C. dubliniensis (5/113; 4.4%). Only five isolates showed antifungal resistance or decreased susceptibility to fluconazole: one C. orthopsilosis isolate from an azole-naïve patient and two C. glabrata, one C. albicans, and one C. dubliniensis isolates from patients treated with azoles, who developed therapeutic failure against azoles later. Our results revealed a low level of antifungal resistance but a notable rate of azole therapeutic failure among patients with candidemia due to non-albicans Candida species, which threaten the efficacy of fluconazole, the most widely used antifungal in southern regions of Iran. Candidemia studies should not be confined to ICUs and treatment should be administered based on species identification and AFST results. Lay Abstract Landscape of candidemia is blurred in Iran, and only two studies from Tehran have extensively explored the epidemiology of candidemia. However, candidemia data from the other regions are notoriously scarce, which precludes from reaching a consensus regarding species distribution, the burden of antifungal resistance, and the clinical features of infected patients. Therefore, we conducted the current prospective candidemia study in Shiraz, one of the largest cities located in the south of Iran, from April 2016 to April 2018. More than 63% of the candidemia infections were treated by fluconazole and species identification and antifungal susceptibility testing were not used for decision making regarding the choice of antifungal treatment. Approximately 70% of the candidemia cases occurred in the wards outside of the ICUs. Candida albicans, C. glabrata, C. parapsilosis, C. tropicalis, and C. dubliniensis were the five leading causative agents of candidemia. Antifungal resistance was rare and fluconazole resistance and/or non-wild type phenotypes were noticed in five isolates, only one was C. albicans and the rest were non-albicans Candida (NAC) species, including C. glabrata, C. dubliniensis, and C. orthopsilosis. Except for C. orthopsilosis, which was isolated from an azole-naïve patient, the rest of isolates were recovered from patients treated with azoles and all showed therapeutic failure to azoles. Collectively, our data will complete the candidemia picture in Iran and show that, although the level of resistance was rare, the therapeutic failure was notable among NAC species, which threatens the efficacy of fluconazole, the most widely used antifungal in Southern regions of Iran. Moreover, we showed that candidemia is poorly managed in Iran since species identification tools along with antifungal susceptibility testing were not used to select appropriate antifungal treatment.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s105-s105
Author(s):  
Romina Bromberg ◽  
Vivian Leung ◽  
Meghan Maloney ◽  
Anu Paranandi ◽  
David Banach

Background: Morbidity and mortality associated with invasive fungal infections and concerns of emerging antifungal resistance have highlighted the importance of optimizing antifungal therapy among hospitalized patients. Little is known about antifungal stewardship (AFS) practices among acute-care hospitals. We sought to assess AFS activities within Connecticut and to identify opportunities for improvement. Methods: An electronic survey assessing AFS practices was distributed to infectious disease physicians or pharmacy antibiotic stewardship program leaders in Connecticut hospitals. Survey questions evaluated AFS activities based on antibiotic stewardship principles, including several CDC Core Elements. Questions assessed antifungal restriction, prospective audit and feedback practices, antifungal utilization measurements, and the perceived utility of a local or statewide antifungal antibiogram. Results: Responses were received from 15 respondents, which represented 20 of 31 hospitals (65%); these hospitals made up the majority of the acute-care hospitals in Connecticut. Furthermore, 18 of these hospitals (58%) include antifungals in their stewardship programs. Also, 16 hospitals (52%) conduct routine review of antifungal ordering and provide feedback to providers for some antifungals, most commonly for amphotericin B, voriconazole, micafungin, isavuconazole, and flucytosine. All hospitals include guidance on intravenous (IV) to oral (PO) conversions, when appropriate. Only 14 of hospitals (45%) require practitioners to document indication(s) for systemic antifungal use. Most hospitals (17, 55%) provide recommendations for de-escalation of therapy in candidemia, though only 4 (13%) have institutional guidelines for candidemia treatment, and only 11 hospital mandates an infectious diseases consultation for candidemia. Assessing outcomes pertaining to antifungal utilization is uncommon; only 8 hospitals (26%) monitor days of therapy and 5 (16%) monitor antifungal expenditures. Antifungal susceptibility testing on Candida bloodstream isolates is performed routinely at 6 of the hospitals (19%). Most respondents (19, 95%) support developing an antibiogram for Candida bloodstream isolates at the statewide level. Conclusions: Although AFS interventions occur in Connecticut hospitals, there are opportunities for enhancement, such as providing institutional guidelines for candidemia treatment and mandating infectious diseases consultation for candidemia. The Connecticut Department of Public Health implemented statewide Candida bloodstream isolate surveillance in 2019, which includes antifungal susceptibility testing. The creation of a statewide antibiogram for Candida bloodstream infections is underway to support empiric antifungal therapy.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None


Dermatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Julia J. Shen ◽  
Maiken C. Arendrup ◽  
Shyam Verma ◽  
Ditte Marie L. Saunte

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Dermatophytosis is commonly encountered in the dermatological clinics. The main aetiological agents in dermatophytosis of skin and nails in humans are <i>Trichophyton</i> (<i>T</i>.) <i>rubrum</i>, <i>T. mentagrophytes</i> and <i>T. interdigitale</i> (former <i>T. mentagrophytes-</i>complex). Terbinafine therapy is usually effective in eradicating infections due to these species by inhibiting their squalene epoxidase (SQLE) enzyme, but increasing numbers of clinically resistant cases and mutations in the SQLE gene have been documented recently. Resistance to antimycotics is phenotypically determined by antifungal susceptibility testing (AFST). However, AFST is not routinely performed for dermatophytes and no breakpoints classifying isolates as susceptible or resistant are available, making it difficult to interpret the clinical impact of a minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC). <b><i>Summary:</i></b> PubMed was systematically searched for terbinafine susceptibility testing of dermatophytes on October 20, 2020, by two individual researchers. The inclusion criteria were <i>in vitro</i> terbinafine susceptibility testing of <i>Trichophyton (T.) rubrum</i>, <i>T. mentagrophytes</i> and <i>T. interdigitale</i> with the broth microdilution technique. The exclusion criteria were non-English written papers. Outcomes were reported as MIC range, geometric mean, modal MIC and MIC<sub>50</sub> and MIC<sub>90</sub> in which 50 or 90% of isolates were inhibited, respectively. The reported MICs ranged from &#x3c;0.001 to &#x3e;64 mg/L. The huge variation in MIC is partly explained by the heterogeneity of the <i>Trichophyton</i> isolates, where some originated from routine specimens (wild types) whereas others came from non-responding patients with a known SQLE gene mutation. Another reason for the great variation in MIC is the use of different AFST methods where MIC values are not directly comparable. High MICs were reported particularly in isolates with SQLE gene mutation. The following SQLE alterations were reported: F397L, L393F, L393S, H440Y, F393I, F393V, F415I, F415S, F415V, S443P, A448T, L335F/A448T, S395P/A448T, L393S/A448T, Q408L/A448T, F397L/A448T, I121M/V237I and H440Y/F484Y in terbinafine-resistant isolates.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document