4.7 Article

Comparison of in vivo pathogenicity of four Candida auris clades in a neutropenic bloodstream infection murine model

期刊

EMERGING MICROBES & INFECTIONS
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 1160-1169

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/22221751.2020.1771218

关键词

Virulence; fungal tissue burden; aggregating Candida auris; myocardial involvement; contraction band necrosis

资金

  1. National Excellence Program (Elaborating and operating an inland student and researcher personal support system) [TA'MOP 4.2.4.A/2-11-1-2012-0001]
  2. European Union
  3. European Social Fund
  4. New National Excellence Program of the Ministry of Human Capacities [U'NKP-19-3]
  5. [EFOP-3.6.3-VEKOP-16-2017-00009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Candida auris is an emerging worldwide concern, but comparative data about the virulence of different C. auris lineages in mammalian hosts is lacking. Different isolates of the four prevalent C. auris clades (South Asian n = 5, East Asian n = 4, South African n = 5, and South American n = 5) were compared to assess their virulence in a neutropenic murine bloodstream infection model with C. albicans as reference. C. auris, regardless of clade, proved to be less virulent than C. albicans. Highest overall mortality at day 21 was observed for the South American clade (96%), followed by the South Asian (80%), South African (45%) and East Asian (44%) clades. Fungal burden results showed close correlation with lethality. Histopathological examination revealed large aggregates of blastoconidia and budding yeast cells in the hearts, kidneys and livers but not in the spleens. The myocardium of apparently healthy sacrificed mice as well as of mice found moribund showed contraction band necrosis in case of all lineages. Regardless of clade, the heart and kidneys were the most heavily affected organs. Isolates of the same clade showed differences in virulence in mice, but a markedly higher virulence of the South American clade was clearly demonstrated.

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