4.7 Article

Enhanced pathogenicity of Candida albicans pre-treated with subinhibitory concentrations of fluconazole in a mouse model of disseminated candidiasis

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
卷 56, 期 6, 页码 1156-1159

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dki383

关键词

farnesol; virulence; candidaemia

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [P20 RRO16454] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: To investigate the relative pathogenicity of Candida albicans treated with subinhibitory concentrations of fluconazole in a mouse model of disseminated candidiasis. Previous studies indicate that these cells secrete 10 times more farnesol than do untreated cells. In our usage, subinhibitory means a concentration which causes a prominent decrease in turbidity but still allows some cell growth. Methods: C. albicans A72 cells were grown overnight in 0-5.0 mu M fluconazole, washed, and inoculated in mice by tail vein injection. Groups of 15 or 16 mice were injected with 1.3 x 10(6) cells and mortality was recorded for 7 days post-inoculation. The levels of farnesol in control and treated C. albicans were determined by GC/MS. Results: The MIC50 for strain A72 was 0.125 mg/L (0.4 mu M). Mice administered C. albicans pre-treated with 0.5 to 1.0 mu M fluconazole died 2.5 to 4 days earlier and had 2 to 4 times higher mortality rates than mice given untreated C. albicans. Fluconazole (0.5 to 1.0 mu M) pre-treated cells were 4.2 to 8.5 times more lethal (P < 0.001) than untreated cells. The extracellular, membrane bound, and intracellular farnesol concentrations of cells pre-treated with 1.0 mu M fluconazole were 12-, 2- and 6-times those of untreated cells. Conclusions: The effects of fluconazole on C. albicans are very concentration-dependent. The enhanced pathogenicity of fluconazole pre-treated C. albicans in mice should be relevant to the therapeutic and prophylactic use of fluconazole. Further research is needed to explore whether farnesol production by C. albicans is a virulence factor.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据