Cited by 25Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal and yeast genetics researchFungal Plant Pathogen Control

Antifungal resistance does not necessarily affect Candida glabrata fitness

Borghi, Elisa, Andreoni, Stefano, Cirasola, Daniela, Ricucci, Valentina, Sciota, Rita, Morace, Giulia·2014·Journal of Chemotherapy

Abstract

Although there has been an overall good coverage of Candida glabrata infections by the echinocandins, emergence of antifungal resistance during therapy has been reported. We investigated, by using an invertebrate host model, the fitness of sequential C. glabrata isolates with different echinocandins susceptibility patterns. The studied strains were isolated from a case of recurrent fungemia with a fatal outcome due to C. glabrata that developed cross-resistance to echinocandins during caspofungin therapy. The sequential strains isolated post-therapy showed a S663P mutation in the Fks2p hot spot 1. In vivo study in the invertebrate host Galleria mellonella did not suggest a fitness cost related to the acquired antifungal resistance, the three isolates displayed a similar rate of killing (P = 0.54). We observed a clear correlation between emergence of antifungal resistance and persistence of the causal agent, probably aided by the unchanged fitness and unresponsiveness in vivo to the adopted therapy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1179/1973947813y.0000000100

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Borghi et al found no significant difference in virulence or fitness when comparing sequential patient C. glabrata isolates with and without the S663P mutation in the Galleria mellonella larvae model.

    “In contrast, Borghi et al found no significant difference in virulence or fitness when comparing sequential patient C. glabrata isolates with and without the S663P mutation in the Galleria mellonella larvae model (35).”

    From Echinocandin resistance: an emerging clinical problem? (2014) · cites this paper as [35]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 29 · Cited by 25

Authors
Borghi, E., Andreoni, S., Cirasola, D., Ricucci, V., Sciota, R., & Morace, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Maggiore della Carita (IT)
Corresponding author
Borghi, Elisa
Venue
Journal of Chemotherapy
Published
2013-12-06
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
32-36
ISSN
  • 1120-009X (ISSN-L)
  • 1973-9478
OpenAlex
W1537111008
Cited by
25
References
29
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Chemotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
Keywords
Candida glabrata, antifungal resistance, echinocandin resistance, caspofungin, fitness cost, Galleria mellonella model, fungal persistence, cross-resistance
MeSH terms
Animals, Antifungal Agents, Candidiasis, Disease Models, Animal, DNA, Fungal, Glucosyltransferases, Humans, Larva, Membrane Proteins, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Moths, Mutation, Survival Rate, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Fungemia, Drug Resistance, Fungal, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins, Candida glabrata, Echinocandins

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