ArticlePDF Available

Evaluation of Susceptibility of Candida species to Six Antifungal Drugs in Iraqi Specimens

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Introduction: Candida spp. has become increasingly resistant to antifungal drugs, with elevated MIC levels causing a negative medical impact and increasing the number of patients at risk of candidiasis. According to the CDC, about 7% of Candida blood samples show reduced susceptibility to fluconazole. Monitoring the antifungal resistance profile of Candida spp. is vital, as non-Albicans species may limit treatment options. Objective: Evaluate the antifungal effectiveness against clinical Candida spp. isolates of six antifungals: amphotericin B, fluconazole, voriconazole, itraconazole, caspofungin, and 5-fluorocytosine. Methods: 100 samples were collected from various clinical samples at the National Centre of Teaching Laboratories in Baghdad, Iraq, from May to December 2023. The effectiveness of six antifungals (fluconazole (FLC), itraconazole (ITR), voriconazole (VRC), amphotericin B (AMB), caspofungin (CAS), and 5-fluorocytosine (5-FC)) was tested using the MA120 Automated ID and AST System (Render) according to CLSI standards. Results: Out of 100 isolates, nine Candida species were identified: C. albicans (54%), C. glabrata (20%), C. dubliniensis (10%), C. tropicalis (6%), C. krusei (5%), C. parapsilosis (2%), and C. rugosa, C. lusitaniae, and C. kyfer (each 1%). The non-susceptible rates to the six antifungals were: 5-FC (42%), FLC (21% intermediate, 9% resistant), AMB (11%), ITR (8%), VRC (6%), CAS (4% intermediate, 1% resistant). Conclusion: We observed increased resistance rates to 5-FC, FLC, ITR, AMB, and VRC, but not to caspofungin. C. albicans showed a high 5-FC non-WT phenotype (72%) with elevated MIC values, while C. glabrata had a 7% non-WT rate against AMB. C. tropicalis and C. parapsilosis revealed limited susceptibility to azoles.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Research Arcle
Journal of Communicable Diseases (P-ISSN: 0019-5138 & E-ISSN: 2581-351X)
Copyright (c) 2024: Author(s). Published by Indian Society for Malaria and Other Communicable Diseases
Journal of Communicable Diseases
Volume 56, Issue 2 - 2024, Pg. No. 53-61
Peer Reviewed & Open Access Journal
Corresponding Author:
Bareq N Al-Nuaimi, Al-Iraqia University, College
of Medicine, Department of Microbiology.
E-mail Id:
Bareq.n.tareq@aliraqia.edu.iq
Orcid Id:

How to cite this arcle:
Al-Ameri A D, zghair A S, Al-Nuaimi N B , Adbdul
     
of Susceptibility of Candida species to Six
J Commun

Date of Submission: 2024-04-16
Date of Acceptance: 2024-06-24
INFO ABSTRACT
Evaluation of Susceptibility of Candida species
to Six Antifungal Drugs in Iraqi Specimens
Dhiey A Al-Aameri1, 2, Bareq N Al-Nuaimi3,4,
4,mah 3


Al-Iraqia University, College of Medicine, Department of Microbiology.
Mustansiriyah University, College of Medicine, Department of Microbiology.
DOI: httpsdoi.org
Introducon: Candida 


CDC, about 7% of Candida 
Candida

Objecve:Candida


Methods:
 

  

  
standards.
Results:Candida 
albicans glabratadubliniensistropicalis
 krusei parapsilosisugosa, C. lusitaniae,
and C. kyfer 
 

Conclusion:
albicans 
 glabrata
had a 7% non-WT rate against AMB. C. tropicalis and C. parapsilosis

Keywords:  Candida
54
Al-Ameri A D et al.
J. Commun. Dis. 2024; 56(2)
ISSN: 0019-5138
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.24321/0019.5138.202432
Introduction
The most prevalent fungi that cause fungaemia are of the
genus Candida
Candida 
in severity from mild to lethal. Candida causes a range
of invasive life-threatening illnesses, from bloodstream

vulvovaginal, genitourinary, and oropharyngeal. Invasive
  
 
increases the length of hospitality. C. albicans is considered
a prevalent species causing candidiasis. Although, lately,
an epidemiological change for non-albicans Candida spp.

for azoles and echinocandin.
 

  

 Unfortunately,

 
main divisions are used for human treatment. Based on

are currently used to treat candidiasis are categorised
       
 


 


Several combined factors have contributed to the clinical
  

  


The rising



and no vaccines invented against Candida. The increased
candidiasis incidence leads to increased drug usage, and

 
7

usage to treat Candida, as they are cheap, show reduced
toxicity, and are available for oral usage. One of the biggest
handicaps to achieving clinical success with azole is the
resistance among species of Candida and Aspergillus.

Due to prolonged azole usage worldwide, Candida species
resistant to azoles have increased, as the MICs level is
rising and failure of clinical treatment. Candida species


Despite that azole and echinocandins are pioneers in
Candida species have progressed
resistance against them.

The echinocandin drugs are
used for yeasts that show resistance to azoles, especially C.
glabrata. Prolonged exposure to echinocandin
reduced Candida
levels with failure of occasional treatment have been
Candida, especially C. glabrata.
Despite the growing resistance against the echinocandin
class, the rate of echinocandin resistance among Candida


with a wide range spectrum, used for systemic fungal


 
usage.



epidemiology. Some studies showed that the frequently
Candida   
    
are uncommon species of Candida, including C. glabrata,
C. guilliermondii, and C. lusitaniae.
Candida species isolates in vitro.
 

 

resistance among Candida species during treatment. Nearly
Candida species intrinsically show resistance to

In the current study, isolates of Candida were tested
against six antifungal drugs, which are fluconazole,
itraconazole, voriconazole, amphotericin B, caspofungin,

 
determined. Also, the highly resistant species of Candida
against the studied drugs were revealed.
Materials and Methods
Sampling

 


samples included sputum, bronch-alveolar lavage, vaginal


55
Al-Ameri A D et al.
J. Commun. Dis. 2024; 56(2)
ISSN: 0019-5138
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.24321/0019.5138.202432
 



Antifungal Susceptibility Test
All isolates were submitted for identification and

flucytosine, amphotericin, caspofungin, fluconazole,
itraconazole, and voriconazole, using the ID&AST System
      

Reading Susceptibility Test Results
      
 
 
       


Statistical Analysis

 
variables on the study parameters. In this study, a chi-
square test was employed to compare the percentage

Results
  










The present study results showed that most candidiasis
 




 

Table 1.Divisions of Candida spp. in Different
Clinical Specimens Including Sex Groups
Site of Sample n (%) Male Female

specimen   
  ---
Urine 
Mouth 

  -



between sex groups
Table 2.Samples Distribution According to Age
Groups
Age Groups (Years) n (%)
 
 
 
 
Total 
Chi-square




Total 


 
p value 



Incidence of Candida species
Candida-infected

C. albicans, C. glabrata, and C. dubliniensis. C. tropicalis, C.
krusei, C. parasilosis, C. rugosa, C. lusitaniae, and C. kyfer
The epidemiology of C. albicans
glabrata dubliniensis tropicalis
krusei parapsilosis 
C. rugosa, C. lusitaniae, and C. kefyr

 

Candida Species Number of Isolates (%)
C. albicans 
C. glabrata 
C. dubliniensis 
C. tropicalis 
C. krusei 
Table 3.Divisions of Candida Species
56
Al-Ameri A D et al.
J. Commun. Dis. 2024; 56(2)
ISSN: 0019-5138
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.24321/0019.5138.202432
Antifungal Susceptibility Proling Results
This study tested Candida isolates 

 
C. parasilosis 
Other Candida species
rugosa, C. lusitaniae, C.
kyfer

Total 
Chi-square




Table 4.Susceptibility of Candida Species Against the Six Studied Antifungals
Anfungal Drugs (n, %)
Species Paern FLC ITR VRC AMB CAS 5-FC
C. albicans

I


-


-



-

-


-
-

-

C. glabrata

I

-

-

-
-

-
-

-



-

-
-
C.
dubliniensis

I


-


-


-


-


-
-

-

C. tropicalis

I





-
-

-


-
-

-
-

-
-
C. krusei

I


-
-

-
-

-
-

-


-
-

-
-
C.
parapsilosis

I

-
-

-
-


-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-
Others

I


-
-

-
-

-


-
-

-


-

All isolates

I





-





-





-


showed that Candida 













    

57
Al-Ameri A D et al.
J. Commun. Dis. 2024; 56(2)
ISSN: 0019-5138
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.24321/0019.5138.202432
Candida albicans Susceptibility Proling
Albicans


showed a WT phenotype, while only four samples revealed
   
 







  





Candida glabrata Susceptibility Proling





glabrata showed no resistance against the drug,



Candida dubliniensis Susceptibility Proling





 For





isolates showed the WT phenotype and only one showed

C. tropicalis Susceptibility Proling

  


samples were resistant. For AMB, six samples presented
  
 

C. krusei Susceptibility Proling


  
 




  


Less Common Candida spp. Susceptibility Proling
C. lusitaniae  



two cultures of C. parapsilosis were included in the current




 


kefyr was the only
isolate included in the current study. C. kefyr showed a



 

According to MIC, the
 


Table 5.Antifungal Susceptibility Prole of 100 Candida Isolates
No. of Isolates at Each Determined MIC Value (µg/mL)
Drug 
         >

MIC


GM
MIC

58
Al-Ameri A D et al.
J. Commun. Dis. 2024; 56(2)
ISSN: 0019-5138
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.24321/0019.5138.202432
C. albicans
 - - - -  7  - - - 
 
 -  -- - - - - - -  
 -  - - - - - - - - - 
 
AMB - - -   - - - - - -  
CAS - - -  - - - - - - - - - 
 
 - -  - - - 7  - - 
C. glabrata
 - - - - - -   
 - - 7 - - -  
 - - -  - - - - - - 
 
AMB - - - - - 
CAS - - -  - - - - - - 
 
 - - - - - -  - 
C. dubliniensis
 - - - - 7 -- - -  
 - - - - - - -
 
 -- - - - - - - -  
AMB - - - - - - - -  
CAS - - -  - - - - - - -  
 - - - - - - - -  
C. tropicalis
 - - - - - - - -  
 - - - - - - - - - 
 
 - - - - - - - - -  
AMB - - - - - - -  
CAS - - - - - - - - - -  
 - - - - - - - - -  

 - - - - - - - - -  
 - - - -- - - - - 
 
 - - - - - - - - 
 
AMB - - - - - - - -  
CAS - - - - - - - - - 
 
 - - - - - - - 
59
Al-Ameri A D et al.
J. Commun. Dis. 2024; 56(2)
ISSN: 0019-5138
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.24321/0019.5138.202432
    

Others
 - - - - - - - - 
 
 - - - - - - - 
 -- - - - - - - 
 
AMB - - - - - - - - 
 
CAS - - - - - - - - - 
 
 - - - - - - -  
Discussion
Epidemiologically, our results show diversity in Candida

albicans together with C. glabrata
 There was a
spectrum change from Candida albicans to non-Albican
Candida 
al.
C. tropicalis, C. krusei, and C. parapsilosis. There were

This is due to the rise in the epidemiology of C. dubliniensis
during recent years.
 
population-based surveillance projects have greatly

 


In the current study, we suggested the in vitro
 
Candida    
Candida

of Candida albicans, and other species in the study except C.

 Candida krusei. As we
 
Candida species in Iraq. This
  


C. albicans remained

dubliniensis
C. tropicalisglabrata
For C. albicans


In our study, C. tropicalis together with C. parapsilosis
 
tropicalis, six isolates


tropicalis and
C. parapsilosis were reported as the Candida species
with the maximum elevated MIC values in the region
other than C. albicans. We reported that C. glabrata

twenty sample cultures of the species demonstrated an

  

in Kuwait.dubliniensis, two

  
dubliniensis 





the Khalifa et al. study in Japan, except for CAS, which


  


  





Conclusion
In conclusion, we have documented the Candida isolates



60
Al-Ameri A D et al.
J. Commun. Dis. 2024; 56(2)
ISSN: 0019-5138
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.24321/0019.5138.202432
      

 [PubMed] [Google
Scholar]
   

    
synthesis by poacic acid and caspofungin. Cell Surf.
 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

  
resistance in pathogenic fungi. Clin Infect Dis.
PubMed] [Google Scholar]


PubMed]
[Google Scholar]




[PubMed] [Google Scholar]
 

 Candida strains.

[PubMed] [Google Scholar]

     


PubMed] [Google Scholar]

        
Amphotericin B and other polyenes-discovery, clinical

PubMed] [Google Scholar]


 


for Candida

PubMed] [Google Scholar]
 

   PubMed] [Google
Scholar]

Morace G, Perdoni F, Borghi E. Antifungal drug
resistance in Candida 
 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


PubMed]
[Google Scholar]

Perea S, Patterson TF. Antifungal resistance in




caspofungin. C. albicans  

glabrata 
AMB. Also, C. tropicalis together with C. parapsilosis are


especially for C. albicans, C. tropicalis, C. glabrata, and C.
parapsilosis.
Further studies and follow-ups are important in Iraq to
 


Source of Funding: None
Conict of Interest: None
References



candidemia in adults and children hospitalized in the
  
PubMed] [Google Scholar]

  
    
PubMed]
[Google Scholar]

       
 
  
for common and uncommon opportunistic fungi
 

 
 
PubMed] [Google Scholar]

 

[PubMed] [Google Scholar]



PubMed] [Google Scholar]
 Candida
auris 
Candida species. Clin Microbiol Newsl.
PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7.
Shor E, Perlin DS. Coping with stress and the emergence
      
PubMed] [Google Scholar]


Candida albicans isolated




61
Al-Ameri A D et al.
J. Commun. Dis. 2024; 56(2)
ISSN: 0019-5138
DOI: hps://doi.org/10.24321/0019.5138.202432

 
 
PubMed] [Google
Scholar]

Barchiesi F, Arzeni D, Caselli F, Scalise G. Primary
resistance to flucytosine among clinical isolates
of Candida spp. J Antimicrob Chemother.
PubMed] [Google Scholar]
 
 
candidemia in a medical center in middle Taiwan.
    
[PubMed] [Google Scholar]


 Candida isolates


PubMed] [Google Scholar]
 

Candida
glabrata species complex, Candida krusei, Candida
parapsilosis species complex and Candida tropicalis


PubMed] [Google Scholar]
 
  

clinical Candida glabrata
PubMed]
[Google Scholar]

        Candida
dubliniensis

[PubMed] [Google Scholar]



  
resistance, and genotyping of Candida krusei recovered

PubMed] [Google
Scholar]


Kashani SM, Karimimoghadam Z, Wang K, Imanieh
  

 
[PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Al-Nuaimi BN, Abdul-Ghani MN, Al-Asadi AB, Al-


IraqGoogle Scholar]




 Candida spp. as

PubMed] [Google Scholar]

       




cutoff values for characterization of geographic
  
PubMed] [Google
Scholar]

      
susceptibility testing of Candida spp. by use of
  

PubMed] [Google Scholar]


Candida 

PubMed] [Google Scholar]

  

epidemiology of Candida species in the Middle East

[PubMed] [Google Scholar]
 
of Candida species, including Candida dubliniensis,
     
[PubMed] [Google Scholar]

   
G. Candida species isolated from clinical samples
  Candida
  PubMed]
[Google Scholar]


Candida albicans and C. dubliniensis

PubMed]
[Google Scholar]\

 
      
PubMed] [Google Scholar]



echinocandin MIC values among Candida glabrata
 

[PubMed] [Google Scholar]
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Vaccination against novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) become highly recommended. In Iraq, three vaccines are available. They are Pfizer-Biontech, Oxford-AstraZenica, and Sino harm vaccines. A cross-sectional retrospective study was performed to a total of 2399 individual who are vaccinated with one of the available vaccines. People who are infected with Covid-19 before and/or after vaccination of either studied SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were also involved in this study (1175 case). Signs and symptoms have been reported for each of confirmed positive cases of Coronavirus disease. Statistical data analyses were applied to reveal the effect of different SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on the incidence of novel coronavirus disease among Iraqi population. Also, the virulence of novel SARS infection after vaccination was determined in response to sings and symptoms of the disease. Pfizer-BioNTech and Sino pharm vaccines show the least percentage (5.1%; 34 and 6.5%; 13) of disease incidence after first dose of vaccination respectively, while Oxford-AstraZenica show the highest percentage 11.5%; 39. In respect to SARSCoV-2 infection after second dose of vaccination, Pfizer-BioNTech percentage are the least (4.5%), Sinopharm (16.5%) and Oxford-AstraZenica (18.0%). The study concluded that incidence of Covid-19 was decreased after second dose vaccination of Pfizer, Sinopharm and AstraZenica vaccines respectively. Oxford-AstraZenica shows the least efficacy upon incidence of Covid-19 than Pfizer-Biontech and Sinopharm vaccines, after first and second dose vaccination, and severity of the symptoms after second dose vaccination.
Article
Full-text available
Background and purpose: Infections by emerging and multiresistant Candida species are becoming more frequent throughout the world. This study aimed to describe Candida species in different wards of a tertiary hospital in Honduras. Materials and methods: The prevalence of species within the C. albicans complex was estimated using a molecular approach, and C. auris was investigated using a yeast pool-based DNA extraction method. In total, 328 yeast isolates were identified using phenotypic approaches. For the identification of species within the C. albicans complex, a molecular approach based on the size polymorphisms of the hpw1 gene was used. In addition, a technique was optimized based on DNA extraction in pools for the rapid identification of C. auris. Results: A total of 11 species of Candida were identified in the hospital wards. C. albicans showed the highest number of isolates (52.4%). Within the C. albicans complex, C. albicans sensu stricto was the most common, followed by C. dubliniensis. However, C. auris was not found. Conclusion: Reports on the distribution of Candida species in Honduras are limited; accordingly, the data from this study are of importance for a better understanding of their epidemiology. Moreover, a simple method was offered for the detection of C. auris that could help in its detection in low-resource settings.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose Secondary bacterial or fungal infections are one of the most important medical complications among patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) candida can cause many problems such as treatment failure, adverse clinical outcomes, and even disease outbreaks. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the prevalence and outcomes of fungal drug-resistant in COVID-19 patients. Methods PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for peer reviewed-articles published in English up to May 20, 2021. Heterogeneity across studies was evaluated using Cochrane’s Q test and the I² index. The pooled point prevalence and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were considered to estimate the prevalence of fungal drug resistance infection in COVID-19 patients. Results Eight eligible articles were included in our meta-analysis. The number of COVID-19 patients with fungal co-infection varied from 5 to 35 among selected studies. The overall pooled prevalence of fungal drug resistance among patients with co-infections of fungal and COVID-19 was 69% (95% CI: 37%, 94%) by using a random-effects model. In terms of specific species, the pooled meta-analysis for Candida Auris was estimated to be 100% (95%CI: 98%, 100%; I² = 0%), for Multi-Candida 59% (95%CI: 38%, 79%; I² = 12.5%), and for Aspergillus 15% (95%CI: 0%, 42%; I² = 0%). Conclusion Our study shows the high prevalence of fungal drug resistance in COVID-19 patients and emphasizes the need to strengthen antimicrobial stewardship programs, close monitoring for treatment failure, and the emergence of resistance upon treatment.
Article
Full-text available
This study was designed to evaluate the prevalence of antifungal resistance, genetic mechanisms associated with in vitro induction of azole and echinocandin resistance and genotyping of Candida krusei , which is intrinsically resistant to fluconazole and is recovered from clinical and non-clinical sources from different countries. Our results indicated that all the isolates were susceptible or had the wild phenotype (WT) to azoles, amphotericin B, and only 1.27% showed non-WT for flucytosine. Although 70.88% of the isolates were resistant to caspofungin, none of them were categorized as echinocandin-resistant as all were susceptible to micafungin and no FKS1 hotspot 1 (HS1) or HS2 mutations were detected. In vitro induction of azole and echinocandin resistance confirmed the rapid development of resistance at low concentrations of fluconazole (4 μg/ml), voriconazole (0.06 μg/ml) and micafungin (0.03 μg/ml), with no difference between clinical and non-clinical isolates in the resistance development. Overexpression of ABC1 gene and FKS1 HS1 mutations were the major mechanisms responsible for azole and echinocandin resistance, respectively. Genotyping of our 79 isolates coupled with 217 other isolates from different sources and geography confirmed that the isolates belong to two main subpopulations, with isolates from human clinical material and Asia being more predominant in cluster 1, and environmental and animals isolates and those from Europe in cluster 2. Our results are of critical concern, since realizing that the C. krusei resistance mechanisms and their genotyping are crucial for guiding specific therapy and for exploring the potential infection source.
Article
Full-text available
Although polyenes were the first broad spectrum antifungal drugs on the market, after 70 years they are still the gold standard to treat a variety of fungal infections. Polyenes such as amphotericin B have a controversial image. They are the antifungal drug class with the broadest spectrum, resistance development is still relatively rare and fungicidal properties are extensive. Yet, they come with a significant host toxicity that limits their use. Relatively recently, the mode of action of polyenes has been revised, new mechanisms of drug resistance were discovered and emergent polyene resistant species such as Candida auris entered the picture. This review provides a short description of the history and clinical use of polyenes, and focusses on the ongoing debate concerning their mode of action, the diversity of resistance mechanisms discovered to date and the most recent trends in polyene resistance development.
Article
Full-text available
Fluconazole was used to test the susceptibility of Candida albicans isolated from different clinical samples, and to detect mutations in ERG11 gene, and their relationship to fluconazole resistance. Forty-eight isolates of Candida albicans were tested for susceptibility using the disc diffusion method (M-44). ERG11 genes of six isolates were amplified (four resistant, two susceptible) and sequenced. The sequenced genes were analyzed to detect the mutations. Out of 48 isolates of Candida albicans, 4 (8%) were resistant to fluconazole. Sixteen-point mutations were detected included 13 silent mutations, and three missense mutations. The mutations of A945C (E266D) and G1609A (V488I) were found only in susceptible Candida albicans isolates, while the mutation of G1456A (V437I) was detected only in resistant Candida albicans isolates. Candida albicans had a high susceptibility against fluconazole. The amino acid substitutions of E266D and V488I have no role in fluconazole resistance, while the substitution of V437I may have a role in developing resistance against fluconazole. Multiple point mutations in ERG11 gene may develop resistance to fluconazole.
Article
Full-text available
Candida glabrata is intrinsically less susceptible to azoles and resistance to echinocandins and reduced susceptibility to amphotericin B has also been detected. Molecular mechanisms of reduced susceptibility (RS) to amphotericin B (AMB) were investigated in C. glabrata strains in Kuwait by sequence analyses of genes involved in ergosterol biosynthesis. A total of 1646 C. glabrata isolates were tested by Etest and results for 12 selected isolates were confirmed by reference broth microdilution. PCR-sequencing of three ( ERG2, ERG6 and ERG11 ) genes was performed for all RS-AMB and 5 selected wild-type C. glabrata isolates by using gene-specific primers. Total cell sterol content was analyzed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Phylogenetic relationship among the isolates was investigated by multilocus sequence typing. Wild-type isolates contained only synonymous mutations in ERG2, ERG6 or ERG11 and total sterol content was similar to reference strains. A nonsynonymous (AGA48AAA, R48K) ERG6 mutation was found in both RS-AMB and wild-type isolates. Four RS-AMB isolates contained novel nonsense mutations at Trp286/Tyr192/Leu341 and 2 isolates contained nonsynonymous (V126F or C198F) mutation in ERG6 and their sterol content were consistent with ERG6 deficiency. Two other RS-AMB isolates contained a novel nonsynonymous (G119S or G122S) ERG2 mutation and their sterol content were consistent with ERG2 deficiency. Of 8 RS-AMB isolates, 1 fluconazole-resistant isolate also contained nonsynonymous Y141H+L381M mutations while 7 isolates contained only synonymous mutations in ERG11 . All isolates with ERG6 / ERG2/ERG11 mutations were genotypically distinct strains. Our data show that ERG6 and ERG2 are major targets conferring RS-AMB in clinical C. glabrata isolates.
Article
Full-text available
Objective: The study aims to speciate clinical Candida isolates and detect their biofilm-forming ability and antifungal resistance. Methods: All the Candida spp. isolated from different clinical samples like pus, urine, blood, and body fluid were included in the study. Biofilm production was tested by the microtiter plate method. Antifungal susceptibility was studied by the disk diffusion method. Patient's demographic details such as age, sex, and clinical information were collected. Presence of other risk factors such as diabetes mellitus, history of antibiotic use, and any urinary tract instrumentations was also recorded. Results: Among 90 Candida species isolated, most predominant species was found to be C. albicans (45.5%) followed by C. tropicalis (28.88%), C. krusei (20%), C. glabrata (3.33%), and C. parapsilosis (2.22%). Candida spp. were isolated from urine (43%), BAL/sputum (18.88%), high vaginal swab (8.88%), suction tips (7.77%), blood and wound swabs (6.66%), pus (3.33%), bile aspirate (2.22%), and deep tissue (1.11%). A larger number of females were affected than males, and the age group of 51 to 60 years was more susceptible to candidiasis. A higher number of C. albicans isolates produced biofilm followed by C. parapsilosis, C. tropicalis, and C. krusei. However, C. glabrata showed no biofilm production in our study. All Candida isolates were 100% sensitive to amphotericin B. Voriconazole was the next effective drug with 81.11% susceptibility. 24.44% of strains were resistant to fluconazole. Conclusion: Speciation of Candida isolates, detection of ability to form the biofilm, and monitoring of antifungal susceptibility testing are necessary for appropriate treatment.
Article
In recent decades, the epidemiology of invasive candidiasis (IC) has progressively changed worldwide. This notably includes emergence of several Candida species. Although some surveillance programs provided global trends in IC epidemiology, data from countries from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) remain scarce. In this manuscript, we reviewed the existing available data on the epidemiology of Candida species associated with IC, particularly candidemia, in MENA region regarding species distribution. As witnessed worldwide, an evident shift of Candidaalbicans towards non-albicansCandida (NAC) has been observed in the MENA region. The worrying emergence of multi-drug resistant Candida species in MENA calls for a better understanding of their epidemiology. This represents an essential prerequisite for the implementation of effective infection control strategies and surveillance systems to prevent IC among high-risk patients.