Advertisement

Mycopathologia

, Volume 184, Issue 1, pp 35–43 | Cite as

In Vitro Interactions of Amphotericin B Combined with Non-antifungal Agents Against Rhodotorula mucilaginosa Strains

  • Tatiana Borba SpaderEmail author
  • Mauricio Ramírez-Castrillón
  • Patricia Valente
  • Sydney Hartz Alves
  • Luiz Carlos Severo
Original Paper
  • 111 Downloads

Abstract

Rhodotorula species are emerging as opportunistic pathogens, causing catheter-associated fungemia in patients with compromised immunity. R. mucilaginosa is considered the most common species involved in human infections. Correct identification and susceptibility testing of Rhodotorula isolates recovered from the blood stream or central nervous system are essential to determine the best management of this unusual infection. The antifungal susceptibility tests showed that Rhodotorula was susceptible to low concentrations of amphotericin B (AMB) but was less susceptible to voriconazole. Combinations of AMB plus several non-antifungal medications were evaluated against 35 susceptible (Rm AMB-S) and resistant (Rm AMB-R) clinical Rhodotorula isolates using the broth microdilution checkerboard technique. We showed that in vitro exposure to increasing concentrations of AMB changed the susceptibility profile to these strains, which were named the Rm AMB-R group. The most synergistic interactions were AMB + simvastatin, followed by AMB + amlodipine and AMB + warfarin. Synergism and antagonism were observed in both groups for the combination AMB + cyclosporine A. AMB combined with a fluoroquinolone (AMB + levofloxacin) also demonstrated antagonism for the Rm AMB-S strains, but a high percentage of synergistic interactions was observed for the Rm AMB-R group. A combination drug approach can provide a different strategy to treat infections caused by AMB-resistant R. mucilaginosa.

Keywords

Rhodotorula mucilaginosa Combination test Synergism Resistance Amphotericin B 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by CNPq (the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development of Brazil), ID 026/15.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Data Genuinity

The authors declare that the data/results of the manuscript do not constitute plagiarism and have not been published elsewhere.

Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies on human and animal performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Biswas SK, Yokoyama K, Nishimura K, Miyaji M. Molecular phylogenetics of the genus Rhodotorula and related basidiomycetous yeasts inferred from the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2001;51(3):1191–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mori T, Nakamura Y, Kato J, et al. Fungemia due to Rhodotorula mucilaginosa after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Transpl Infect Dis. 2012;14(1):91–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tuon FF, Costa SF. Rhodotorula infection. A systematic review of 128 cases from literature. Rev Iberoam Micol. 2008;25:135–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Diekema DJ, Petroelje B, Messer SA, Hollis RJ, Pfaller MA. Activities of available and investigational antifungal agents against Rhodotorula species. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43(1):476–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tsiodras S, Papageorgiou S, Meletiadis J, et al. Rhodotorula mucilaginosa associated meningitis: a subacute entity with high mortality. Case report and review. Med Mycol Case Rep. 2014;6:46–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ahmed A, Aggarwal M, Chiu R, Ramratnam B, Rinaldi M, Flanigan TP. A fatal case of Rhodotorula meningitis in AIDS. Med Health R I. 1998;81(1):22–3.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Almeida GMD, Costa SF, Melhem M, et al. Rhodotorula spp. isolated from blood cultures: clinical and microbiological aspects. Med Mycol. 2008;46(6):547–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    White T, Bruns T, Lee S, et al. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. PCR Protoc: Guide Methods Appl. 1990;18:315–22.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fekete-Forgács K, Gyüre L, Lenkey B. Changes of virulence factors accompanying the phenomenon of induced fluconazole resistance in Candida albicans. Mycoses. 2000;43(7–8):273–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clinical Laboratory and Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. CLSI document M27-A3. 3rd ed. Wayne: Clinical Laboratory and Standards Institute; 2008. p. 1–40.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cuenca-Estrella M. Combinations of antifungal agents in therapy—what value are they? J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004;54:854–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Musiol R, Mrozek-Wilczkiewicz A, Polanski J. Synergy against fungal pathogens: working together is better than working alone. Curr Med Chem. 2014;21(7):870–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oliveira AS, Gaspar CA, Palmeira-de-Oliveira R, Martinez-de-Oliveira J, Palmeira-de-Oliveira A. Anti-Candida activity of fluoxetine alone and combined with fluconazole: a synergistic action against fluconazole-resistant strains. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(7):4224–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johnson MD, MacDougall C, Ostrosky-Zeichner L, Perfect JR, Rex JH. Combination antifungal therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48(3):693–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Rare and emerging opportunistic fungal pathogens: concern for resistance beyond Candida albicans and Aspergillus fumigatus. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42:4419–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zaas AK, Boyce M, Schell W, Lodge BA, Miller JL, Perfect JR. Risk of fungemia due to Rhodotorula and antifungal susceptibility testing of Rhodotorula isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 2003;41(11):5233–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ellis D. Amphotericin B: spectrum and resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2002;49(Suppl 1):7–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yoon SA, Vazquez JA, Steffan PE, Sobel JD, Akins RA. High-frequency, in vitro reversible switching of Candida lusitaniae clinical isolates from amphotericin B susceptibility to resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1999;43(4):836–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kumar R, Shukla PK. Amphotericin B resistance leads to enhanced proteinase and phospholipase activity and reduced germ tube formation in Candida albicans. Fungal Biol. 2010;114(2–3):189–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barker KS, Crisp S, Wiederhold N, et al. Genome-wide expression profiling reveals genes associated with amphotericin B and fluconazole resistance in experimentally induced antifungal resistant isolates of Candida albicans. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004;54(2):376–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Terblanche M, Almog Y, Rosenson RS, Smith TS, Hackam DG. Statins and sepsis: multiple modifications at multiple levels. Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2007;7(5):358–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cabral ME, Figueroa LIC, Fariña JI. Synergistic antifungal activity of statin–azole associations as witnessed by Saccharomyces cerevisiae- and Candida utilis-bioassays and ergosterol quantification. Rev Iberoam Micol. 2013;30(1):31–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brilhante RSN, Caetano EP, de Oliveira JS, et al. Simvastatin inhibits planktonic cells and biofilms of Candida and Cryptococcus species. Brazilian J Infect Dis. 2015;19(5):459–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chamilos G, Lewis RE, Kontoyiannis DP. Lovastatin has significant activity against zygomycetes and interacts synergistically with voriconazole. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50(1):96–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nyilasi I, Kocsubé S, Krizsán K, et al. Susceptibility of clinically important dermatophytes against statins and different statin-antifungal combinations. Med Mycol. 2013;52(2):1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yang S, Liao Y, Cong L, Lu X, Yang R. In vitro interactions between non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antifungal agents against planktonic and biofilm forms of Trichosporon asahii. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(6):e0157047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Venturini TP, Rossato L, Spader TB, et al. In vitro synergisms obtained by amphotericin B and voriconazole associated with non-antifungal agents against Fusarium spp. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;71(2):126–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chen YL, Yu SJ, Huang HY, et al. Calcineurin controls hyphal growth, virulence, and drug tolerance of Candida tropicalis. Eukaryot Cell. 2014;13(7):844–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liu S, Yue L, Gu W, Li X, Zhang L, Sun S. Synergistic effect of fluconazole and calcium channel blockers against resistant Candida albicans. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(3):e0150859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Guo Q, Sun S, Yu J, Li Y, Cao L. Synergistic activity of azoles with amiodarone against clinically resistant Candida albicans tested by chequerboard and time-kill methods. J Med Microbiol. 2008;57(4):457–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hong RH, Koch RJ. Possible role of anticoagulation in the treatment of rhinocerebral mucormycosis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000;122(4):577–8.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gu W, Guo D, Zhang L, Xu D, Sun S. The synergistic effect of azoles and fluoxetine against resistant Candida albicans strains is attributed to attenuating fungal virulence. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(10):6179–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Heller I, Leitner S, Dierich MP, Lass-Flörl C. Serotonin (5-HT) enhances the activity of amphotericin B against Aspergillus fumigatus in vitro. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2004;24(4):401–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sanchez C, Hyttel J. Comparison of the effects of antidepressants and their metabolites on reuptake of biogenic amines and on receptor binding. Cell Mol Neurobiol. 1999;19(4):467–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mo D, Li X, Wei L, Sun C, Liang H, Cao C. In vitro interactions of calcineurin inhibitors with conventional antifungal agents against the yeast form of Penicillium marneffei. Mycopathologia. 2014;178(3–4):217–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cordeiro RA, Macedo RB, Teixeira CEC, et al. The calcineurin inhibitor cyclosporin A exhibits synergism with antifungals against Candida parapsilosis species complex. J Med Microbiol. 2014;63(Pt7):936–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Uppuluri P, Nett J, Heitman J, Andes D. Synergistic effect of calcineurin inhibitors and fluconazole against Candida albicans biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52(3):1127–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sun S, Li Y, Guo QJ, Shi CW, Yu JL, Ma L. In vitro interactions between tacrolimus and Azoles against Candida albicans determined by different methods. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52:409–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Petrou MA, Rogers TR. In-vitro activity of antifungal agents in combination with four quinolones. Drugs Exp Clin Res. 1988;14(1):9–18.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nakajima R, Kitamura A, Someya K, Tanaka M, Sato K. In vitro and in vivo antifungal activities of DU-6859a, a fluoroquinolone, in combination with amphotericin B and fluconazole against pathogenic fungi. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1995;39(7):1517–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Vitale RG, Afeltra J, De Hoog GS, Rijs AJ, Verweij PE. In vitro activity of amphotericin B and itraconazole in combination with flucytosine, sulfadiazine and quinolones against Exophiala spinifera. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2003;51:1297–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sugar AM, Liu XP, Chen RJ. Effectiveness of quinolone antibiotics in modulating the effects of antifungal drugs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997;41(11):2518–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratório de Patologia e MicologiaHospital Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto AlegrePorto AlegreBrazil
  2. 2.Departamento de Microbiologia, Imunologia e ParasitologiaUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)Porto AlegreBrazil
  3. 3.Research group in Microbiology, Industry and Environment (GIMIA/CICBA), Universidad Santiago de CaliCaliColombia
  4. 4.Laboratório de Pesquisas Micológicas (LAPEMI), Departamento de Microbiologia e ParasitologiaUniversidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)Santa MariaBrazil

Personalised recommendations