Cited by 55Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal Plant Pathogen ControlFungal and yeast genetics research

Rate of FKS Mutations among Consecutive Candida Isolates Causing Bloodstream Infection

Open access
Shields, Ryan K., Nguyen, M. Hong, Press, Ellen G., Cumbie, Richard, Driscoll, Eileen, Pasculle, A. William, Clancy, Cornelius J.·2015·Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Abstract

Precise FKS mutation rates among Candida species are undefined because studies have not systematically screened consecutive, disease-causing isolates. The Sensititre YeastOne (SYO) assay measures echinocandin MICs against Candida with less variability than reference broth microdilution methods. However, clinical breakpoint MICs may overstate caspofungin nonsusceptibility compared to other agents. Our objectives were to determine CandidaFKS mutation rates by studying consecutive bloodstream isolates and to determine if discrepant susceptibility results were associated with FKS mutations.FKS hot spots were sequenced in echinocandin-intermediate and -resistant isolates and those from patients with breakthrough candidemia or ≥3 days of prior echinocandin exposure. Overall, 453 isolates from 384 patients underwent susceptibility testing; 16% were echinocandin intermediate or resistant. Intermediate susceptibility rates were higher for Candida glabrata than for other species (P< 0.0001) and higher for caspofungin than for other agents (P< 0.0001). Resistance rates were similar between agents.FKS mutations were detected in 5% of sequenced isolates and 2% of isolates overall. Corresponding rates among C. glabrata isolates were 8% and 4%, respectively. Among Candida albicans isolates, rates were 5% and <1%, respectively. Mutations occurred exclusively with prior echinocandin exposure and were not detected in other species. Isolates with discrepant susceptibility results did not harbor FKS mutations. Mutation rates among isolates resistant to ≥2, 1, and 0 agents were 75%, 13%, and 0%, respectively. In conclusion,FKS mutations were uncommon among non-C. glabrata species, even with prior echinocandin exposure. Discrepancies in echinocandin susceptibility by SYO testing were not driven by mutations and likely reflect imprecise caspofungin clinical breakpoints.

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 · 10.1128/aac.01973-15

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • A review of the most recent data suggests that many, but not all, breakthrough Candida infections occur due to organisms that are resistant to one or more antifungals, and are dominated by non-albicans Candida species, especially C. glabrata, C. krusei, C. parapsilosis, and C. tropicalis.

    “A review of the most recent data pertaining to BT Candida infections suggests that many, but not all, of these infections occur due to organisms that are resistant to one or more antifungals, and accordingly are dominated by non-albicans Candida species, especially C. glabrata, C. krusei, C. parapsilosis, and C. tropicalis.89–92”

    From Epidemiology of Invasive Candidiasis (2024) · cites this paper as [90]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shields, R. K., Nguyen, M. H., Press, E. G., Cumbie, R., Driscoll, E., Pasculle, A. W., & Clancy, C. J.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Published
2015-12
Volume
59
Issue
12
Pages
7465-7470
ISSN
  • 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6596
OpenAlex
W2179911245
Cited by
55
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
4.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (KL2TR000146)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (K08AI114883)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
Keywords
Candida, bloodstream infection, echinocandin resistance, caspofungin, Candida glabrata, Candida albicans, Sensititre YeastOne
MeSH terms
Caspofungin, Micafungin, Antifungal Agents, Candida, Candidiasis, Fungal Proteins, Humans, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Drug Resistance, Fungal, Candida glabrata, Echinocandins, Lipopeptides, Mutation Rate

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