Biomedical subjects

Javier Afeltra

Publications and source records attributed to Javier Afeltra.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2025

Global guideline for the diagnosis and management of candidiasis: an initiative of the ECMM in cooperation with ISHAM and ASM.

Candida species are the predominant cause of fungal infections in patients treated in hospital, contributing substantially to morbidity and mortality. Candidaemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis primarily affect patients who are immunocompromised or critically ill. In contrast, mucocutaneous forms of candidiasis, such as oral thrush and vulvovaginal candidiasis, can occur in otherwise healthy individuals. Although mucocutaneous candidiasis is generally not life-threatening, it can cause considerable discomfort, recurrent infections, and complications, particularly in patients with underlying conditions such as diabetes or in those taking immunosuppressive therapies. The rise of difficult-to-treat Candida infections is driven by new host factors and antifungal resistance. Pathogens, such as Candida auris (Candidozyma auris) and fluconazole-resistant Candida parapsilosis, pose serious global health risks. Recent taxonomic revisions have reclassified several Candida spp, potentially causing confusion in clinical practice. Current management guidelines are limited in scope, with poor coverage of emerging pathogens and new treatment options. In this Review, we provide updated recommendations for managing Candida infections, with detailed evidence summaries available in the appendix.

Humans↗

PubMed2005

Antifungal combinations.

The increase in fungal infections and the change in fungal epidemiology is caused by the extensive use of antifungal agents to treat fungal infections that are being diagnosed in severly immunocompromised hosts. In addition, opportunistic fungal infections resistant to antifungal drugs have become increasingly common, and the armamentarium for treatment remains limited. A possible approach to overcoming these problems is to combine antifungal drugs, especially if the mechanisms of action are different. The in vitro test is the first step to evaluate possible antifungal combinations. In this chapter, the three most frequently used metholodologies are described: checkerboard, E-test, and time-kill curves. The description of each technique and intrepretaion of the results are addressed in detail.

Antifungal Agents↗

PubMed2004

Potent synergistic in vitro interaction between nonantimicrobial membrane-active compounds and itraconazole against clinical isolates of Aspergillus fumigatus resistant to itraconazole.

To develop new approaches for the treatment of invasive infections caused by Aspergillus fumigatus, the in vitro interactions between itraconazole (ITZ) and seven different nonantimicrobial membrane-active compounds--amiodarone (AMD), amiloride, lidocaine, lansoprazole (LAN), nifedipine (NIF), verapamil, and fluphenazine--against seven ITZ-susceptible and seven ITZ-resistant (ITZ-R) strains were evaluated by the checkerboard microdilution method based on National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M-38A guidelines. The nature and the intensity of the interactions were assessed by a nonparametric approach (fractional inhibitory concentration [FIC] index model), a fully parametric response surface approach (Greco model) of the Loewe additivity no-interaction theory, and the nonparametric (Prichard model) and semiparametric response surface approaches of the Bliss independence (BI) no-interaction theory. Statistically significant synergy was found for the combination of ITZ and AMD and the combination of LAN and NIF, although with different intensities against ITZ-R strains. The FIC index values ranged from 1 to 0.02 for ITZ-AMD, 0.53 to 0.04 for ITZ-LAN, and 0.28 to 0.06 for ITZ-NIF. By use of the BI-based model, the strongest synergy was found for the combination of ITZ with AMD, followed by the combination of ITZ and NIF. The parametric models could not be fit adequately because most of the drugs alone did not show any effect and, thus, no sigmoid dose-response. In general, the combination of ITZ with calcium pump blockers displayed in vitro synergistic activity, primarily against ITZ-R strains, and warrants further investigation.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2002

In vitro synergistic interaction between amphotericin B and pentamidine against Scedosporium prolificans.

To develop new approaches for the treatment of invasive infections caused by Scedosporium prolificans, the in vitro interaction between amphotericin B and pentamidine against 30 clinical isolates was evaluated using a checkerboard microdilution method based on the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M38-P guidelines. The interaction between the drugs was analyzed using fractional inhibitory concentration index (FICI) analysis and response surface modeling. Amphotericin B alone was inactive against all the isolates. The geometric mean MIC for pentamidine was 57 micro g/ml (range, 8 to 256 micro g/ml; MIC at which 50% of the isolates tested were inhibited [MIC(50)], 64 micro g/ml; MIC(90), 128 micro g/ml). The combination was synergistic against 28 of 30 isolates (93.3%) by FICI analysis and 30 of 30 (100%) by response surface modeling analysis. Antagonism was not observed.

Amphotericin B↗

PubMed2002

Method for measuring postantifungal effect in Aspergillus species.

An in vitro method for determination of postantifungal effect (PAFE) in molds was developed by using three isolates each of Aspergillus fumigatus, A. flavus, A. terreus, A. nidulans, and A. ustus. MICs of amphotericin B and itraconazole were determined by using National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards guidelines (M38-P). The inoculum was prepared in RPMI 1640 broth buffered with MOPS (morpholinepropanesulfonic acid) at pH 7.0, and conidia were exposed to amphotericin B and itraconazole at concentrations of 4, 1, and 0.25 times the MIC, each for 4, 2, and 1 h at 37 degrees C. The same procedure was followed for controls with drug-free medium. Following exposure, the conidia were washed three times in saline and the numbers of CFU per milliliter were determined. Exposed and control conidia were then inoculated into microtitration plates and incubated at 37 degrees C for 48 h in a spectrophotometer reader. The optical density (OD) was measured automatically at 10-min intervals, resulting in growth curves. PAFE was quantified by comparing three arbitrary points in the control growth curve, the first increase of OD and the points when 20 and 50% of the maximal growth were reached, with the growth curve of drug-exposed conidia. Amphotericin B induced PAFE in A. fumigatus at four times the MIC after 2 and 4 h of exposure ranging from 1.83 to 6.00 h and 9.33 to 10.80 h, respectively. Significantly shorter PAFEs or lack of PAFE was observed for A. terreus, A. ustus, and A. nidulans. Itraconazole did not induce measurable PAFE in the Aspergillus isolates at any concentration or exposure time tested. Further studies are warranted to investigate the implications of PAFE in relation to clinical efficacy and dosing frequency.

Amphotericin B↗

PubMed2002

In vitro activities of pentamidine, pyrimethamine, trimethoprim, and sulfonamides against Aspergillus species.

The susceptibilities of 70 strains of Aspergillus species were tested against seven different sulfa drugs and pentamidine by a microdilution method with RPMI 1640 and yeast nitrogen base media. Sulfamethoxazole, sulfadiazine, and pentamidine were active in vitro. The MICs obtained with RPMI 1640 were significantly higher than those with yeast nitrogen base. More studies are needed to further elucidate the action of these drugs.

Anti-Infective Agents↗

PubMed2002

In vitro susceptibilities of zygomycetes to combinations of antimicrobial agents.

Combinations of antimicrobial agents were tested against 35 strains of zygomycetes. The interaction between amphotericin B and rifampin was synergistic or additive. Flucytosine alone was inactive and, upon combination with amphotericin B, synergy was not achieved. The combination of amphotericin B with terbinafine was synergistic for 20% of strains, and the interaction between terbinafine and voriconazole was synergistic for 44% of strains. Antagonism was not observed.

Amphotericin B↗