4.4 Article

The molecular epidemiology of serial Candida tropicalis isolates from ICU patients as revealed by multilocus sequence typing and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis

Journal

INFECTION GENETICS AND EVOLUTION
Volume 9, Issue 5, Pages 912-920

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.meegid.2009.06.011

Keywords

Candida tropicalis; Molecular typing; MLST; PFGE; Susceptibility; Flucytosine resistance

Funding

  1. Center for Disease Control, Department of Health, Taiwan [DOH96-DC-2012]
  2. National Research Program for Genome Medicine [98-0324-01-F20]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The genetic profiles of 50 Candida tropicalis isolates serially collected from 14 patients during a prospective surveillance study in adult intensive care units (ICUs) were characterized by multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) of Nael restriction fragments. A total of 21 diploid sequence types (DSTs) and 43 genotypes were differentiated by MLST and PFGE, respectively. Significant correlations were found between PFGE genotypes and DST types (P < 0.05). Dendrogram5 generated by either MLST or PFGE-Nael showed that most isolates from the same patient co-clustered with high similarity regardless of the anatomical source of isolation. Maintenance, microvariation or replacement of C tropicalis isolates could be observed within the individual patients by further analysis of variations in MLST sequence data. Antifungal susceptibility testing revealed that 17 (34%) of 50 isolates presented high MICs to flucytosine (MIC >= 8 mu g/mL). Sixteen (94%) of these isolates belonged to DST 164, and these were collected from four patients with different PFGE genotypes. Isolates sharing the same DST may represent a common clone that underwent extensive mutation over time to cope with drug selection pressure, different hosts or different geographic environments. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available