1887

Abstract

We determined the antifungal activity of liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) against 604 clinical yeast isolates. Amphotericin B deoxycholate (D-AmB) was tested in parallel against all the isolates. Susceptibility testing was performed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) M27-A3 method. Overall, L-AmB was highly active against the isolates (mean MIC, 0.42 µg ml; MIC, 1 µg ml; 97.2 % of MICs were ≤1 µg ml) and comparable to D-AmB (mean MIC, 0.48 µg ml; MIC, 1 µg ml; 97.3 % of MICs were ≤1 µg ml). The activity of D-AmB and L-AmB was correlated (  = 0.61; exp(), 2.3; 95 % CI, 2.19–2.44, <0.001). (mean MICs of D-AmB and L-AmB, 0.39 µg ml and 0.31 µg ml, respectively) and (mean MICs of D-AmB and L-AmB, 0.38 µg ml and 0.35 µg ml, respectively) were the species most susceptible to the agents tested, while (currently named ) (mean MICs of D-AmB and L-AmB, 1.27 µg ml and 1.13 µg ml, respectively) was the least susceptible. The excellent activity of L-AmB may have important implications for empirical treatment approaches and support its role in treatment of a wide range of invasive infections due to yeasts.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.075507-0
2014-12-01
2020-09-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/63/12/1638.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.075507-0&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Adler-Moore J., Proffitt R. T. 2002; AmBisome: liposomal formulation, structure, mechanism of action and pre-clinical experience. J Antimicrob Chemother 49:Suppl. 121–30 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anaissie E., Paetznick V., Proffitt R., Adler-Moore J., Bodey G. P. 1991; Comparison of the in vitro antifungal activity of free and liposome-encapsulated amphotericin B. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 10:665–668 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Carrillo-Muñoz A. J., Quindós G., Tur C., Ruesga M. T., Miranda Y., del Valle O., Cossum P. A., Wallace T. L. 1999; In-vitro antifungal activity of liposomal nystatin in comparison with nystatin, amphotericin B cholesteryl sulphate, liposomal amphotericin B, amphotericin B lipid complex, amphotericin B desoxycholate, fluconazole and itraconazole. J Antimicrob Chemother 44:397–401 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Cifani C., Costantino S., Massi M., Berrino L. 2012; Commercially available lipid formulations of amphotericin B: are they bioequivalent and therapeutically equivalent?. Acta Biomed 83:154–163[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CLSI 2008 Reference Method for Broth Dilution Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Yeasts; Approved standard, 3rd edn. M27-A3. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute;
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Diekema D. J., Messer S. A., Boyken L. B., Hollis R. J., Kroeger J., Tendolkar S., Pfaller M. A. 2009; In vitro activity of seven systemically active antifungal agents against a large global collection of rare Candida species as determined by CLSI broth microdilution methods. J Clin Microbiol 47:3170–3177 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dupont B. 2002; Overview of the lipid formulations of amphotericin B. J Antimicrob Chemother 49:Suppl. 131–36 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Enoch D. A., Ludlam H. A., Brown N. M. 2006; Invasive fungal infections: a review of epidemiology and management options. J Med Microbiol 55:809–818 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. González G. M., Elizondo M., Ayala J. 2008; Trends in species distribution and susceptibility of bloodstream isolates of Candida collected in Monterrey, Mexico, to seven antifungal agents: results of a 3-year (2004 to 2007) surveillance study. J Clin Microbiol 46:2902–2905 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hull C. M., Bader O., Parker J. E., Weig M., Gross U., Warrilow A. G., Kelly D. E., Kelly S. L. 2012a; Two clinical isolates of Candida glabrata exhibiting reduced sensitivity to amphotericin B both harbor mutations in ERG2. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 56:6417–6421 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hull C. M., Parker J. E., Bader O., Weig M., Gross U., Warrilow A. G., Kelly D. E., Kelly S. L. 2012b; Facultative sterol uptake in an ergosterol-deficient clinical isolate of Candida glabrata harboring a missense mutation in ERG11 and exhibiting cross-resistance to azoles and amphotericin B. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 56:4223–4232 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Jessup C., Reyes G., Fothergill A., McCarthy D., Rinaldi M., Messer S., Pfaller M., Ghannoum M. 2000; A head-on comparison of the in vitro antifungal activity of conventional and lipid-based amphotericin B: a multicenter study. J Chemother 12:22–29[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kanafani Z. A., Perfect J. R. 2008; Antimicrobial resistance: resistance to antifungal agents: mechanisms and clinical impact. Clin Infect Dis 46:120–128 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Kiraz N., Oz Y. 2011; Species distribution and in vitro antifungal susceptibility of clinical Candida isolates from a university hospital in Turkey over a 5-year period. Med Mycol 49:126–131 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lacerda J. F., Oliveira C. M. 2013; Diagnosis and treatment of invasive fungal infections focus on liposomal amphotericin B. Clin Drug Investig 33:Suppl. 15–14 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Lass-Flörl C., Mayr A., Perkhofer S., Hinterberger G., Hausdorfer J., Speth C., Fille M. 2008; Activities of antifungal agents against yeasts and filamentous fungi: assessment according to the methodology of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 52:3637–3641 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Maertens J., Marchetti O., Herbrecht R., Cornely O. A., Flückiger U., Frêre P., Gachot B., Heinz W. J., Lass-Flörl C.& other authors ( 2011; European guidelines for antifungal management in leukemia and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: summary of the ECIL 3--2009 update. Bone Marrow Transplant 46:709–718 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Miceli M. H., Chandrasekar P. 2012; Safety and efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B for the empirical therapy of invasive fungal infections in immunocompromised patients. Infect Drug Resist 5:9–16[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Moen M. D., Lyseng-Williamson K. A., Scott L. J. 2009; Liposomal amphotericin B: a review of its use as empirical therapy in febrile neutropenia and in the treatment of invasive fungal infections. Drugs 69:361–392 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Morrell M., Fraser V. J., Kollef M. H. 2005; Delaying the empiric treatment of candida bloodstream infection until positive blood culture results are obtained: a potential risk factor for hospital mortality. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 49:3640–3645 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Pappas P. G., Rex J. H., Sobel J. D., Filler S. G., Dismukes W. E., Walsh T. J., Edwards J. E.Infectious Diseases Society of America 2004; Guidelines for treatment of candidiasis. Clin Infect Dis 38:161–189 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Pappas P. G., Kauffman C. A., Andes D., Benjamin D. K. Jr, Calandra T. F., Edwards J. E. Jr, Filler S. G., Fisher J. F., Kullberg B. J.& other authors ( 2009; Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 48:503–535 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Pfaller M. A., Messer S. A., Hollis R. J., Jones R. N., Diekema D. J. 2002; In vitro activities of ravuconazole and voriconazole compared with those of four approved systemic antifungal agents against 6,970 clinical isolates of Candida spp.. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46:1723–1727 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Ranque S., Lachaud L., Gari-Toussaint M., Michel-Nguyen A., Mallié M., Gaudart J., Bertout S. 2012; Interlaboratory reproducibility of Etest amphotericin B and caspofungin yeast susceptibility testing and comparison with the CLSI method. J Clin Microbiol 50:2305–2309 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Saliba F., Dupont B. 2008; Renal impairment and amphotericin B formulations in patients with invasive fungal infections. Med Mycol 46:97–112 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Schmalreck A. F., Lackner M., Becker K., Fegeler W., Czaika V., Ulmer H., Lass-Flörl C. 2014; Phylogenetic relationships matter: antifungal susceptibility among clinically relevant yeasts. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 58:1575–1585 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Subcommittee on Antifungal Susceptibility Testing (AFST) of the ESCMID European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) 2008; EUCAST definitive document EDef 7.1: method for the determination of broth dilution MICs of antifungal agents for fermentative yeasts. Clin Microbiol Infect 14:398–405 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Taur Y., Cohen N., Dubnow S., Paskovaty A., Seo S. K. 2010; Effect of antifungal therapy timing on mortality in cancer patients with candidemia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:184–190 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Ullmann A. J., Akova M., Herbrecht R., Viscoli C., Arendrup M. C., Arikan-Akdagli S., Bassetti M., Bille J., Calandra T.& other authors ( 2012; ESCMID* guideline for the diagnosis and management of Candida diseases 2012: adults with haematological malignancies and after haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT). Clin Microbiol Infect 18:Suppl. 753–67 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Wade R. L., Chaudhari P., Natoli J. L., Taylor R. J., Nathanson B. H., Horn D. L. 2013; Nephrotoxicity and other adverse events among inpatients receiving liposomal amphotericin B or amphotericin B lipid complex. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 76:361–367 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.075507-0
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.075507-0
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error