Biofi lm production among Candida spp. causing invasive candidiasis in patients with hematological malignancies and without hematological malignancies

Introduction. Biofi lm-forming ability among Candida spp. on indwelling medical devices may have a negative infl uence on the outcome of invasive candidiasis in various groups of patients.

Aim. The objective of this study was to evaluate the biofi lm-forming ability among Candida spp. isolated from clinical specimens in patients with hematological malignancies and patients without hematological malignancies.

Materials and methods. Biofi lm production among Candida spp. was studied using XTT (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) reduction assay. Candida spp. were classifi ed as biofi lm-forming, having optical density equal to and more than 0.1, and non-biofi lmforming with optical density less than 0.1.

Results. A total of 428 Candida spp. (C. albicans n = 192, C. parapsilosis n = 121, C. krusei n = 40, C. tropicalis n = 38, C. glabrata n = 37) were evaluated (172 from hematological patients, 256 from non-hematological patients, 361 from blood culture, 67 from other sterile specimens). Biofi lm-forming ability was detected among 179 (41.8%) Candida spp. with the same rate in hematological patients and non-hematological patients (41.9 % and 41.8 %, respectively). Biofi lm production predominated among non-C. albicans (52.5 %) compared to C. albicans (28.6 %, p = 0.001). Biofi lm production prevailed among C. tropicalis (89.5 %) and C. krusei (75 %) compared to C. parapsilosis (41.3 %), C. albicans (28.6 %), and C. glabrata (27 %, respectively, p < 0.05). Biofi lm-forming ability among C. tropicalis and C. krusei dominated in both groups of patients. Biofi lm production among C. albicans prevailed in non-hematological patients compared to hematological patients (34.1% vs 18.2%, p = 0.03). There were no differences in biofi lm production among Candida spp. isolated from blood culture (42.9%) and other sterile specimens (35.8%, p = 0.3).

Conclusion. Biofi lm-forming ability varied among the Candida spp. and prevailed among C. tropicalis and C. krusei. Biofi lm production among Candida spp. was detected with the same rate in hematological and non-hematological patients.

1. Klyasova G.А., Malchikova A.O., Tandilova K.S. et al. Treatment of candidemia caused by Candida albicans and Candida non-albicans in patients with hematological malignancies. Terapevticheskiy Arkhive. 2019; 91 (8): 84–92. DOI: 10.26442/00403660.2019.08.000385 (In Russian).

2. Tumbarello M., Fiori B., Trecarichi E.M. et al. Risk factors and outcomes of candidemia caused by biofi lm-forming isolates in a tertiary care hospital. PloS One. 2012; 7(3): e33705. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033705.

3. Klyasova G.A. Antimicrobial therapy. In: Program treatment of blood system diseases. Ed. V.G. Savchenko. Moscow: Praktika; 2012. P. 829–53. (In Russian).

4. Klyasova G., Speranskaya L., Mironova A. et al. The pathogens causing sepsis in immunocompromised patients: structure and problems of antibiotic resistance. Results of multi-center cooperative study. Gematologiya i Transfusiologiya. 2007; 52(1): 11–8. (In Russian).

5. Puerta-Alcalde P., Cardozo C., Marco F. et al. Changing epidemiology of bloodstream infection in a 25-years hematopoietic stem cell transplant program: current challenges and pitfalls on empiric antibiotic treatment impacting outcomes. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2020; 55: 603–612. DOI:10.1038/s41409-019- 0701-3.

6. Tumbarello M., Posteraro B., Trecarichi E.M. et al. Biofi lm production by Candida species and inadequate antifungal therapy as predictors of mortality for patients with candidemia. JCM. 2007; 45(6): 1843–50. DOI: 10.1128/ JCM.00131-07.

7. Tascini C., Sozio E., Corte L. et al. The role of biofi lm forming on mortality in patients with candidemia: a study derived from real world data. Infect Dis. 2018; 50(3): 214–9. DOI: 10.1080/23744235.2017.1384956.

8. Pierce C.G., Uppuluri P., Tristan A.R. et al. A simple and reproducible 96-well plate-based method for the formation of fungal biofi lms and its application to antifungal susceptibility testing. Nat protoc. 2008; 3(9): 1494–500. DOI: 10.1038/ nport.2008.141.

9. Pannanusorn S., Fernandez V., Römling U. Prevalence of biofi lm formation in clinical isolates of Candida species causing bloodstream infection. Mycoses. 2013; 56(3): 264–72. DOI: 10.1111/myc.12014.

10. Gokce G., Cerikcioglu N., Yagci A. Acid proteinase, phospholipase, and biofi lm production of Candida species isolated from blood cultures. Mycopathologia. 2007; 164(6): 265–9. DOI:10.1007/s11046-007-9053-4.

11. Pongrácz J., Benedek K., Juhász E. et al. In vitro biofi lm production of Candida bloodstream isolates: any association with clinical characteristics? J Med Microbiol. 2016; 65(4): 272–7. DOI: 10.1099/jmm.0.000207.

12. Gangneux J. P., Cornet M., Bailly S. et al. Clinical impact of antifungal susceptibility, biofi lm formation and mannoside expression of Candida yeasts on the outcome of invasive candidiasis in ICU: an ancillary study on the prospective AmarCAND2 cohort. Front Microbiol. 2018; 9: 2907. DOI: 10.3389/ fmicb.2018.02907.

13. Shin J.H., Kee S.J., Shin M.G. et al. Biofi lm production by isolates of Candida species recovered from nonneutropenic patients: comparison of bloodstream isolates with isolates from other sources. J Clin Microbiol. 2002; 40(4): 1244–8. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.40.4.1244-1248.2002.

14. Kumar C.P., Menon T. Biofilm production by clinical isolates of Candida species. Med Mycol. 2006; 44(1): 99–101. DOI: 10.1080/13693780500338084.

15. Arora S., Dhuria N., Jindal N. et al. Speciation, biofi lm formation and antifungal susceptibility of Candida isolates. Int J Res Dev Pharm L Sci. 2017; 6: 2517–21. DOI: 10.21276/IJRDPL. 2278-0238.2017.6(2).2517-2521.

16. Sida H., Shah P., Pethani J. et al. Study of biofi lm formation as a virulence marker in Candida species isolated from various clinical specimens. Int J Med Sci Public Health. 2016; 5(5): 842–6. DOI:10.5455/ijmsph.2016.24082015139.

17. Jain N., Kohli R., Cook E. et al. Biofi lm formation by and antifungal susceptibility of Candida isolates from urine. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007; 73(6): 1697– 703. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.02439-06.

18. Hawser S.P., Douglas L.J. Biofi lm formation by Candida species on the surface of catheter materials in vitro. Infect Immun. 1994; 62(3): 915–21. DOI: 10.1128/IAI.62.3.915-921.1994.

19. Radford D.R., Sweet S.P., Challacombe S.J., Walter J.D. Adherence of Candida albicans to denture-base materials with different surface fi nishes. J Dent. 1998; 26(7): 577–83. DOI: 10.1016/s0300-5712(97)00034-1.

20. Estivill D., Arias A., Torres-Lana A. et al. Biofi lm formation by fi ve species of Candida on three clinical materials. J Microbiol Methods. 2011; 86(2): 238–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2011.05.019.

21. Krom B.P., Cohen J.B., Feser G.E.M., Cihlar R.L. Optimized candidal biofi lm microtiter assay. J Microbiol Methods. 2007; 68(2): 421–3. DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2006.08.003.

22. Frade J.P., Arthington‐Skaggs B.A. Effect of serum and surface characteristics on Candida albicans biofi lm formation. Mycoses. 2011; 54(4): 154–62. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0507.2010.01862.x.