Whole genome analysis of echinocandin non-susceptible Candida Glabrata clinical isolates: a multi-center study in China.
Candida Glabrata
Echinocandin resistance
Whole genome sequence
Journal
BMC microbiology
ISSN: 1471-2180
Titre abrégé: BMC Microbiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100966981
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Nov 2023
16 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
08
09
2023
accepted:
03
11
2023
medline:
27
11
2023
pubmed:
17
11
2023
entrez:
17
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Candida glabrata is an important cause of invasive candidiasis. Echinocandins are the first-line treatment of invasive candidiasis caused by C. glabrata. The epidemiological echinocandin sensitivity requires long-term surveillance and the understanding about whole genome characteristics of echinocandin non-susceptible isolates was limited. The present study investigated the echinocandin susceptibility of 1650 C. glabrata clinical isolates in China from August 2014 to July 2019. The in vitro activity of micafungin was significantly better than those of caspofungin and anidulafungin (P < 0.001), assessed by MIC The echinocandins are highly active against C. glabrata in China with a resistant rate of 0.79%. Echinocandin non-susceptible isolates carried common evolved genes which are related with reduced caspofungin sensitivity. In-host evolution of C. glabrata accompanied intensive changing of adhesins profile.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Candida glabrata is an important cause of invasive candidiasis. Echinocandins are the first-line treatment of invasive candidiasis caused by C. glabrata. The epidemiological echinocandin sensitivity requires long-term surveillance and the understanding about whole genome characteristics of echinocandin non-susceptible isolates was limited.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The present study investigated the echinocandin susceptibility of 1650 C. glabrata clinical isolates in China from August 2014 to July 2019. The in vitro activity of micafungin was significantly better than those of caspofungin and anidulafungin (P < 0.001), assessed by MIC
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The echinocandins are highly active against C. glabrata in China with a resistant rate of 0.79%. Echinocandin non-susceptible isolates carried common evolved genes which are related with reduced caspofungin sensitivity. In-host evolution of C. glabrata accompanied intensive changing of adhesins profile.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37974063
doi: 10.1186/s12866-023-03105-3
pii: 10.1186/s12866-023-03105-3
pmc: PMC10652494
doi:
Substances chimiques
Echinocandins
0
Caspofungin
F0XDI6ZL63
Antifungal Agents
0
Types de publication
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
341Subventions
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 82002178
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 32000024
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 81971979
Organisme : National Key Research and Development Program of China
ID : 2022YFC2303002
Organisme : National High Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding
ID : 2022-PUMCH-C-052
Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Bioinformatics. 2010 Mar 1;26(5):589-95
pubmed: 20080505
Genome Res. 2010 Sep;20(9):1297-303
pubmed: 20644199
Nature. 2023 Apr;616(7955):190-198
pubmed: 36949198
J Clin Microbiol. 2004 Jul;42(7):3142-6
pubmed: 15243073
Bioinformatics. 2018 Sep 1;34(17):i884-i890
pubmed: 30423086
Nucleic Acids Res. 2021 Jul 2;49(W1):W293-W296
pubmed: 33885785
Front Microbiol. 2018 Dec 03;9:2946
pubmed: 30559734
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017 Sep 22;61(10):
pubmed: 28784671
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2015 Dec 14;2(4):ofv163
pubmed: 26677456
Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2006 Sep;70(3):583-604
pubmed: 16959962
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Aug;51(8):2571-81
pubmed: 23720791
Genes Dev. 2003 Sep 15;17(18):2245-58
pubmed: 12952896
Cell Mol Life Sci. 2017 Nov;74(22):4121-4132
pubmed: 28623509
Mol Biol Evol. 2018 Jun 1;35(6):1547-1549
pubmed: 29722887
Front Microbiol. 2018 Jul 13;9:1523
pubmed: 30057573
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2017 Sep;50(3):318-324
pubmed: 28669831
Genetics. 2022 May 5;221(1):
pubmed: 35199143
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019 Mar 15;6(Suppl 1):S79-S94
pubmed: 30895218
Virulence. 2022 Dec;13(1):1573-1589
pubmed: 36120738
Emerg Microbes Infect. 2019;8(1):1619-1625
pubmed: 31711370
Bioinformatics. 2006 Jul 15;22(14):e431-9
pubmed: 16873504
FEMS Yeast Res. 2014 Jun;14(4):529-35
pubmed: 24528571
Nat Genet. 2012 Jun 17;44(7):821-4
pubmed: 22706312
J Fungi (Basel). 2020 Aug 18;6(3):
pubmed: 32824785
Hum Genet. 2012 May;131(5):747-56
pubmed: 22143225
Front Microbiol. 2016 Dec 23;7:2038
pubmed: 28066361
Methods. 2020 Apr 1;176:82-90
pubmed: 31059831
Nucleic Acids Res. 2017 Jan 4;45(D1):D592-D596
pubmed: 27738138
Front Microbiol. 2017 May 23;8:880
pubmed: 28588560
Fly (Austin). 2012 Apr-Jun;6(2):80-92
pubmed: 22728672
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014 Aug;58(8):4690-6
pubmed: 24890592
J Fungi (Basel). 2018 Jun 05;4(2):
pubmed: 29874814
J Comput Biol. 2012 May;19(5):455-77
pubmed: 22506599
Curr Biol. 2018 Jan 8;28(1):15-27.e7
pubmed: 29249661
Mol Microbiol. 2012 Oct;86(2):303-13
pubmed: 22909030
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009 Sep;53(9):3690-9
pubmed: 19546367
Mol Biol Evol. 2015 Jan;32(1):268-74
pubmed: 25371430
Mol Microbiol. 2005 Feb;55(4):1246-58
pubmed: 15686568
Lancet Infect Dis. 2017 Dec;17(12):e383-e392
pubmed: 28774698
J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Dec;41(12):5709-17
pubmed: 14662965
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017 Apr 1;72(4):1270
pubmed: 28204502
J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Nov;50(11):3435-42
pubmed: 22875889
FEMS Yeast Res. 2010 Feb;10(1):2-13
pubmed: 19686338
J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Feb;52(2):572-7
pubmed: 24478490
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014 May;33(5):673-88
pubmed: 24249283