4.6 Article

Activity of Amphotericin B and Anidulafungin Combined with Rifampicin, Clarithromycin, Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid, N-Acetylcysteine, and Farnesol against Candida tropicalis Biofilms

Journal

JOURNAL OF FUNGI
Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jof3010016

Keywords

Candida tropicalis; CDC Biofilm Reactor; biofilm; amphotericin B; anidulafungin; PTFE; titanium; anti-biofilm compounds

Funding

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain [PI12/02786]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We evaluated the activity of (1) amphotericin-B (AMB), combined with rifampicin (RIF), clarithromycin (CLA), N-acetylcysteine (NAC), ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), and farnesol (FAR) (1000, 1000, 1000, 4000, and 30,000 mg/L, and 300 mu M, respectively), against Candida tropicalis biofilms formed on polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and (2) anidulafungin (ANF) combined with the same compounds at 8, 10, 5, 40, and 30 mg/L, and 30 mu M, respectively, against biofilms formed on titanium. Biofilm growth kinetics were performed in a CDC Biofilm Reactor (CBR). PTFE or titanium disks were removed from the CBR at 24, 48, 72, and 96 h to determine the Log(10)CFU/cm(2). Killing kinetics were performed by adding the drugs to 24-h-mature biofilms (time 0). Disks were removed after 24, 48, and 72 h of drug exposure to determine Log(10)CFU/cm(2). Viable cells in biofilms were 4.73 and 4.29 Log(10)CFU/cm(2) on PTFE and titanium, respectively. Maximum Log(10) decreases in CFU/cm(2) depend on the combination and were: 3.53 (AMB + EDTA), 2.65 (AMB + RIF), 3.07 (AMB + NAC), 2.52 (AMB + CLA), 1.49 (AMB + FAR), 2.26 (ANF + EDTA), 2.45 (ANF + RIF), 2.47 (ANF + NAC), 1.52 (ANF + CLA), and 0.44 (ANF + FAR). In conclusion, EDTA, NAC, RIF, and CLA improve the activity of AMB and ANF against biofilms developed on both surfaces, which could be an effective strategy against C. tropicalis biofilm-related infections.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available