CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 5Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal and yeast genetics researchFungal Infections and Studies

Biofilm Alterations on the Stepwise Acquisition of Fluconazole-resistant Candida Albicans Isolates

Open access
Song, Na-Na, Qian, Guan-Yu, Zheng, Hai-Lin, Zhou, Xiao-Wei, Mei, Huan, Li, Dong-Mei, Li, Xiao-Fang, Liu, Wei-Da·2022·International Journal of Dermatology and Venereology
DOI 10.1097/jd9.0000000000000223PMC PMC9521591
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objectives: By assessing and comparing the phenotypic changes on the stepwise acquisition of fluconazole resistant Candida albicans isolates, we could find and describe the relationship between drug resistance and biofilm formation ability in a series of clonal strains. Methods: We performed antifungal susceptibility of five drugs (fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, caspofungin and amphotericin B) to further verify the antifungal activity of the six isolates in vitro. Then we combined hyphal formation assay, cell surface hydrophobicity test positively related to adherence ability, and biofilm assays in vitro to observe and compare the phenotypic characteristics of our six clonal strains. Results: Biofilm capability is enhanced for four drug- intermediate strains, whereas the initial susceptible strain and the final resistant strain are both poor in adherence, hyphal growth and biofilm formation. Conclusions: It was suggested that the biofilm formation ability were not absolutely related to the degree of fluconazole resistance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/jd9.0000000000000223

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The five C. albicans strains used had fluconazole MICs of 0.25, 1, 8, 32, and >64 μg/mL, respectively.

    “The strains analyzed included Ca1 (MIC = 0.25 µg/mL, sensitive), Ca2 (MIC = 1 µg/mL, sensitive), Ca8 (MIC = 8 µg/mL, initial resistance), Ca14 (MIC = 32 µg/mL, increased resistance), and Ca17 (MIC >64 µg/mL, highly resistant).”

    From Potential role of lysine acetylation in the stepwise adaptation of <i>Candida albicans</i> to fluconazole (2025) · cites this paper as [35]

    Table 1 in the Results reports fluconazole MICs of 8 μg/mL for Ca8 and 32 μg/mL for Ca14; its value of 128 μg/mL for Ca17 also satisfies >64. But it reports 0.5 μg/mL for Ca1 and 2.0 μg/mL for Ca2, not the claimed 0.25 and 1 μg/mL. The Methods also list a sixth strain, Ca5, though the citing sentence does not say its list is exhaustive. (LLM, conf=0.93)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. [1]Lohse MB Gulati M Johnson AD. Development and regulation of single- and multi-species Candida albicans biofilms. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2018; 16(1): 19– 31. doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2017.107. 29062072 PMC5726514 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [3]Mathé L Van Dijck P. Recent insights into Candida albicans biofilm resistance mechanisms. Curr Genet. 2013; 59(4): 251– 264. doi:10.1007/s00294-013-0400-3. 23974350 PMC3824241 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [4]Williams DW Jordan RP Wei XQ. Interactions of Candida albicans with host epithelial surfaces. J Oral Microbiol. 2013; 5. doi:10.3402/jom.v5i0.22434. PMC3805843 24155995 · DOI
  4. [5]Winter MB Salcedo EC Lohse MB. Global Identification of Biofilm-Specific Proteolysis in Candida albicans. mBio. 2016; 7(5):e01514-16. doi:10.1128/mBio.01514-16. PMC5021810 27624133 · DOI
  5. [6]Li X Yan Z Xu J. Quantitative variation of biofilms among strains in natural populations of Candida albicans. Microbiology (Reading). 2003; 149(Pt 2): 353– 362. doi:10.1099/mic.0.25932-0. 12624197 · DOI
  6. [7]Förster TM Mogavero S Dräger A. Enemies and brothers in arms: Candida albicans and gram-positive bacteria. Cell Microbiol. 2016; 18(12): 1709– 1715. doi:10.1111/cmi.12657. 27552083 · DOI
  7. [8]White TC Pfaller MA Rinaldi MG. Stable azole drug resistance associated with a substrain of Candida albicans from an HIV-infected patient. Oral Dis. 1997; 3(Suppl 1): S102– S109. doi:10.1111/j.1601-0825.1997.tb00336.x. 9456667 · DOI · Paper page
  8. [9]Klotz SA Drutz DJ Zajic JE. Factors governing adherence of Candida species to plastic surfaces. Infect Immun. 1985; 50(1): 97– 101. doi:10.1128/iai.50.1.97-101.1985. 3899942 PMC262141 · DOI · Paper page
  9. [10]Pais P Galocha M Viana R. Microevolution of the pathogenic yeasts Candida albicans and Candida glabrata during antifungal therapy and host infection. Microb Cell. 2019; 6(3): 142– 159. doi:10.15698/mic2019.03.670. 30854392 PMC6402363 · DOI
  10. [12]Chandra J Mukherjee PK. Candida Biofilms: Development, Architecture, and Resistance. Microbiol Spectr. 2015; 3(4). doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.MB-0020-2015. PMC4566167 26350306 · DOI
  11. [13]Krasowska A Sigler K. How microorganisms use hydrophobicity and what does this mean for human needs. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2014; 4: 112. doi:10.3389/fcimb.2014.00112. 25191645 PMC4137226 · DOI
  12. [14]Samaranayake YH Wu PC Samaranayake LP. Relationship between the cell surface hydrophobicity and adherence of Candida krusei and Candida albicans to epithelial and denture acrylic surfaces. APMIS. 1995; 103(10): 707– 713. 8534429
  13. [15]Romo JA Zhang H Cai H. Global Transcriptomic Analysis of the Candida albicans Response to Treatment with a Novel Inhibitor of Filamentation. mSphere. 2019; 4(5):e00620-19. doi:10.1128/mSphere.00620-19. PMC6739497 31511371 · DOI
  14. [16]Konstantinidou N Morrissey JP. Co-occurence of filamentation defects and impaired biofilms in Candida albicans protein kinase mutants. FEMS Yeast Res. 2015; 15(8):fov092. doi:10.1093/femsyr/fov092. 26472756 · DOI
  15. [17]Carlisle PL Banerjee M Lazzell A. Expression levels of a filament-specific transcriptional regulator are sufficient to determine Candida albicans morphology and virulence. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009; 106(2): 599– 604. doi:10.1073/pnas.0804061106. 19116272 PMC2626749 · DOI · Paper page
  16. [19]Park YN Srikantha T Daniels KJ. Protocol for identifying natural agents that selectively affect adhesion, thickness, architecture, cellular phenotypes, extracellular matrix, and human white blood cell impenetrability of Candida albicans biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017; 61(11): e01319- 17. doi:10.1128/AAC.01319-17. 28893778 PMC5655110 · DOI
  17. [20]Hosseini M Shapouri Moghaddam A Derakhshan S. Correlation Between Biofilm Formation and Antibiotic Resistance in MRSA and MSSA Isolated from Clinical Samples in Iran: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Microb Drug Resist. 2020; 26(9): 1071– 1080. doi:10.1089/mdr.2020.0001. 32159447 · DOI
  18. [21]Yang X Dong F Qian S. Accessory gene regulator (agr) dysfunction was unusual in Staphylococcus aureus isolated from Chinese children. BMC Microbiol. 2019; 19(1): 95. doi:10.1186/s12866-019-1465-z. 31088356 PMC6518674 · DOI
  19. [22]Seneviratne CJ Suriyanarayanan T Swarup S. Transcriptomics Analysis Reveals Putative Genes Involved in Biofilm Formation and Biofilm-associated Drug Resistance of Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod. 2017; 43(6): 949– 955. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2017.01.020. 28457636 · DOI
  20. [25]White TC. The presence of an R467K amino acid substitution and loss of allelic variation correlate with an azole-resistant lanosterol 14alpha demethylase in Candida albicans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997; 41(7): 1488– 1494. doi:10.1128/AAC.41.7.1488. 9210671 PMC163945 · DOI · Paper page
  21. [26]Coste A Turner V Ischer F. A mutation in Tac1p, a transcription factor regulating CDR1 and CDR2, is coupled with loss of heterozygosity at chromosome 5 to mediate antifungal resistance in Candida albicans. Genetics. 2006; 172(4): 2139– 2156. doi:10.1534/genetics.105.054767. 16452151 PMC1456413 · DOI · Paper page
  22. [28]Coste A Selmecki A Forche A. Genotypic evolution of azole resistance mechanisms in sequential Candida albicans isolates. Eukaryot Cell. 2007; 6(10): 1889– 1904. doi:10.1128/EC.00151-07. 17693596 PMC2043391 · DOI · Paper page
  23. [29]Nobile CJ Fox EP Nett JE. A recently evolved transcriptional network controls biofilm development in Candida albicans. Cell. 2012; 148(1-2): 126– 138. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2011.10.048. 22265407 PMC3266547 · DOI · Paper page
  24. [30]Mukherjee PK Chandra J Kuhn DM. Mechanism of fluconazole resistance in Candida albicans biofilms: phase-specific role of efflux pumps and membrane sterols. Infect Immun. 2003; 71(8): 4333– 4340. doi:10.1128/IAI.71.8.4333-4340.2003. 12874310 PMC165995 · DOI · Paper page
  25. [31]Ksiezopolska E Gabaldón T. Evolutionary Emergence of Drug Resistance in Candida Opportunistic Pathogens. Genes (Basel). 2018; 9(9):461. doi:10.3390/genes9090461. PMC6162425 30235884 · DOI · Paper page
  26. [32]Prasad R Shah AH Rawal MK. Antifungals: Mechanism of Action and Drug Resistance. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2016; 892: 327– 349. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25304-6_14. 26721281 · DOI
  27. [33]Fox EP Bui CK Nett JE. An expanded regulatory network temporally controls Candida albicans biofilm formation. Mol Microbiol. 2015; 96(6): 1226– 1239. doi:10.1111/mmi.13002. 25784162 PMC4464956 · DOI · Paper page
  28. [34]Nett J Andes D. Candida albicans biofilm development, modeling a host-pathogen interaction. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2006; 9(4): 340– 345. doi:10.1016/j.mib.2006.06.007. 16815078 · DOI · Paper page
  29. [35]Andes D Nett J Oschel P. Development and characterization of an in vivo central venous catheter Candida albicans biofilm model. Infect Immun. 2004; 72(10): 6023– 6031. doi:10.1128/IAI.72.10.6023-6031.2004. 15385506 PMC517581 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Song, N.-N., Qian, G.-Y., Zheng, H.-L., Zhou, X.-W., Mei, H., Li, D.-M., Li, X.-F., & Liu, W.-D.
Affiliations
  • Department of Mycology, Hospital for Skin Diseases (Institute of Dermatology), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210042, China
  • Department of Dermatology, Xuzhou Tumor Hospital, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221000, China
  • Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN)
  • Georgetown University Medical Center (US)
Venue
International Journal of Dermatology and Venereology
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2022-01-19
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
132-139
ISSN
2096-5540 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/jd9.0000000000000223
PMC
PMC9521591
OpenAlex
W4205377423
Cited by
5
References
6
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 2
FWCI
0.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Dermatology and Venereology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
Keywords
Candida albicans, fluconazole resistance, biofilm formation, antifungal susceptibility, clonal strains, hyphal development, cell surface hydrophobicity, adherence, caspofungin, amphotericin B, itraconazole, voriconazole

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review