Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Dermatophytes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Dermatophytes and Dermatophytoses

Abstract

In order to help guide treatment, antifungal susceptibility testing is often performed in clinical microbiology laboratories. The results of these in vitro assays are used by clinicians to change therapy should resistance be detected, continue with current regimens with susceptible results, and as an aide in determining possible reasons for treatment failure. Antifungal susceptibility testing can be performed against dermatophytes, although fewer assay formats are recommended for these types of fungi compared to yeasts and molds. In addition, clinical breakpoints and epidemiologic cut-off values are not currently available for dermatophytes to help with the interpretation of these results. However, recently studies have demonstrated that reduced in vitro susceptibility to terbinafine, an allylamine commonly used in the treatment of dermatophyte infections, may be associated with clinical failures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. CLSI. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi, third edition. Document M38Ed3. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arendrup MC, Meletiadis J, Mouton JW, Lagrou K, Hamal P, Guinea J. EUCAST definitive document e.Def 9.3.1: method for the determination of broth dilution minimum inhibitory concentrations of antifungal agents for conidia forming moulds. Basel: EUCAST; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dabas Y, Xess I, Singh G, Pandey M, Meena S. Molecular identification and antifungal susceptibility patterns of clinical dermatophytes following CLSI and EUCAST guidelines. J Fungi (Basel). 2017;3(2)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Risslegger B, Lass-Florl C, Blum G, Lackner M. Evaluation of a modified EUCAST fragmented-mycelium inoculum method for in vitro susceptibility testing of dermatophytes and the activity of novel antifungal agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(6):3675–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Norris HA, Elewski BE, Ghannoum MA. Optimal growth conditions for the determination of the antifungal susceptibility of three species of dermatophytes with the use of a microdilution method. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;40(6 Pt 2):S9–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jessup CJ, Warner J, Isham N, Hasan I, Ghannoum MA. Antifungal susceptibility testing of dermatophytes: establishing a medium for inducing conidial growth and evaluation of susceptibility of clinical isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38(1):341–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schmalreck A, Willinger B, Czaika V, Fegeler W, Becker K, Blum G, et al. Susceptibility screening of hyphae-forming fungi with a new, easy, and fast inoculum preparation method. Mycopathologia. 2012;174(5–6):467–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Thatai P, Sapra B. Critical review on retrospective and prospective changes in antifungal susceptibility testing for dermatophytes. Mycoses. 2016;59(10):615–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Coelho LM, Aquino-Ferreira R, Maffei CM, Martinez-Rossi NM. In vitro antifungal drug susceptibilities of dermatophytes microconidia and arthroconidia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008;62(4):758–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Arrese JE, Pierard-Franchimont C, Pierard GE. A plea to bridge the gap between antifungals and the management of onychomycosis. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2001;2(5):281–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mercer DK, Stewart CS, Miller L, Robertson J, Duncan VMS, O’Neil DA. Improved methods for assessing therapeutic potential of antifungal agents against dermatophytes and their application in the development of NP213, a novel onychomycosis therapy candidate. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019;63(5)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fernandez-Torres B, Carrillo-Munoz A, Ortoneda M, Pujol I, Pastor FJ, Guarro J. Interlaboratory evaluation of the etest for antifungal susceptibility testing of dermatophytes. Med Mycol. 2003;41(2):125–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. CLSI. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts; approved standard - fourth edition. Document M27Ed4. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  14. CLSI. Performance standards for antifungal susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi, first edition. Document M61. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ghannoum MA, Arthington-Skaggs B, Chaturvedi V, Espinel-Ingroff A, Pfaller MA, Rennie R, et al. Interlaboratory study of quality control isolates for a broth microdilution method (modified CLSI M38-A) for testing susceptibilities of dermatophytes to antifungals. J Clin Microbiol. 2006;44(12):4353–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ghannoum MA, Chaturvedi V, Espinel-Ingroff A, Pfaller MA, Rinaldi MG, Lee-Yang W, et al. Intra- and interlaboratory study of a method for testing the antifungal susceptibilities of dermatophytes. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42(7):2977–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rex JH, Pfaller MA. Has antifungal susceptibility testing come of age? Clin Infect Dis. 2002;35(8):982–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Rex JH, Pfaller MA, Galgiani JN, Bartlett MS, Espinel-Ingroff A, Ghannoum MA, et al. Development of interpretive breakpoints for antifungal susceptibility testing: conceptual framework and analysis of in vitro-in vivo correlation data for fluconazole, itraconazole, and Candida infections. Subcommittee on antifungal susceptibility testing of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;24(2):235–47.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Arendrup MC, Cuenca-Estrella M, Lass-Florl C, Hope W. EUCAST-AFST. EUCAST technical note on the EUCAST definitive document EDef 7.2: method for the determination of broth dilution minimum inhibitory concentrations of antifungal agents for yeasts EEef 7.2 (EUCAST-AFST). Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18(7):E246–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. EUCAST. EUCAST antifungal agents breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs 2018. Available from http://www.eucast.org/astoffungi/clinicalbreakpointsforantifungals/.

  21. CLSI. Performance standards for antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts, first edition. Document M60. Wayne: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Khurana A, Sardana K, Chowdhary A. Antifungal resistance in dermatophytes: recent trends and therapeutic implications. Fungal Genet Biol. 2019;132:103255.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Faergemann J, Zehender H, Denouel J, Millerioux L. Levels of terbinafine in plasma, stratum corneum, dermis-epidermis (without stratum corneum), sebum, hair and nails during and after 250 mg terbinafine orally once per day for four weeks. Acta Derm Venereol. 1993;73(4):305–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Prescribing information, Lamisil oral tablet. East Hanover: Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Epstein WL, Shah VP, Riegelman S. Griseofulvin levels in stratum corneum. Study after oral administration in man. Arch Dermatol. 1972;106(3):344–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Pfaller MA, Rex JH, Rinaldi MG. Antifungal susceptibility testing: technical advances and potential clinical applications. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;24(5):776–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Khurana A, Masih A, Chowdhary A, Sardana K, Borker S, Gupta A, et al. Correlation of in vitro susceptibility based on mics and squalene epoxidase mutations with clinical response to terbinafine in patients with Tinea corporis/cruris. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(12):e01038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Favre B, Ghannoum MA, Ryder NS. Biochemical characterization of terbinafine-resistant Trichophyton rubrum isolates. Med Mycol. 2004;42(6):525–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Salehi Z, Shams-Ghahfarokhi M, Razzaghi-Abyaneh M. Antifungal drug susceptibility profile of clinically important dermatophytes and determination of point mutations in terbinafine-resistant isolates. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018;37(10):1841–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Yamada T, Maeda M, Alshahni MM, Tanaka R, Yaguchi T, Bontems O, et al. Terbinafine resistance of Trichophyton clinical isolates caused by specific point mutations in the squalene epoxidase gene. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(7):e00115-17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mukherjee PK, Leidich SD, Isham N, Leitner I, Ryder NS, Ghannoum MA. Clinical Trichophyton rubrum strain exhibiting primary resistance to terbinafine. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47(1):82–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Singh A, Masih A, Khurana A, Singh PK, Gupta M, Hagen F, et al. High terbinafine resistance in Trichophyton interdigitale isolates in Delhi, India harbouring mutations in the squalene epoxidase gene. Mycoses. 2018;61(7):477–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Rudramurthy SM, Shankarnarayan SA, Dogra S, Shaw D, Mushtaq K, Paul RA, et al. Mutation in the squalene epoxidase gene of Trichophyton interdigitale and Trichophyton rubrum associated with allylamine resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(5):e02522

    Google Scholar 

  34. Schosler L, Andersen LK, Arendrup MC, Sommerlund M. Recurrent terbinafine resistant Trichophyton rubrum infection in a child with congenital ichthyosis. Pediatr Dermatol. 2018;35(2):259–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Digby SS, Hald M, Arendrup MC, Hjort SV, Kofoed K. Darier disease complicated by terbinafine-resistant Trichophyton rubrum: a case report. Acta Derm Venereol. 2017;97(1):139–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Turnidge J, Paterson DL. Setting and revising antibacterial susceptibility breakpoints. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2007;20(3):391–408.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Progress in antifungal susceptibility testing of Candida spp. by use of Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute broth microdilution methods, 2010 to 2012. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(9):2846–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Alexander BD, Byrne TC, Smith KL, Hanson KE, Anstrom KJ, Perfect JR, et al. Comparative evaluation of etest and sensititre yeastone panels against the clinical and laboratory standards institute M27-A2 reference broth microdilution method for testing Candida susceptibility to seven antifungal agents. J Clin Microbiol. 2007;45(3):698–706.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Cuenca-Estrella M, Gomez-Lopez A, Alastruey-Izquierdo A, Bernal-Martinez L, Cuesta I, Buitrago MJ, et al. Comparison of the Vitek 2 antifungal susceptibility system with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) broth microdilution reference methods and with the Sensititre YeastOne and Etest techniques for in vitro detection of antifungal resistance in yeast isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(5):1782–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Espinel-Ingroff A, Pfaller M, Messer SA, Knapp CC, Holliday N, Killian SB. Multicenter comparison of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal panel with the NCCLS M27-A2 reference method for testing new antifungal agents against clinical isolates of Candida spp. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42(2):718–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Espinel-Ingroff A, Pfaller M, Messer SA, Knapp CC, Killian S, Norris HA, et al. Multicenter comparison of the sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal panel with the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M27-a reference method for testing clinical isolates of common and emerging Candida spp., Cryptococcus spp., and other yeasts and yeast-like organisms. J Clin Microbiol. 1999;37(3):591–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Pfaller MA, Chaturvedi V, Diekema DJ, Ghannoum MA, Holliday NM, Killian SB, et al. Comparison of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal panel with CLSI microdilution for antifungal susceptibility testing of the echinocandins against Candida spp., using new clinical breakpoints and epidemiological cutoff values. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012;73(4):365–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Pfaller MA, Chaturvedi V, Diekema DJ, Ghannoum MA, Holliday NM, Killian SB, et al. Clinical evaluation of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal panel for antifungal susceptibility testing of the echinocandins anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin. J Clin Microbiol. 2008;46(7):2155–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Pfaller MA, Espinel-Ingroff A, Jones RN. Clinical evaluation of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal plate for antifungal susceptibility testing of the new triazoles voriconazole, posaconazole, and ravuconazole. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42(10):4577–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Pfaller MA, Jones RN, Microbiology Resource Committee College of American Pathologist. Performance accuracy of antibacterial and antifungal susceptibility test methods: report from the College of American Pathologists microbiology surveys program (2001-2003). Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130(6):767–78.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Pujol I, Capilla J, Fernandez-Torres B, Ortoneda M, Guarro J. Use of the Sensititre colorimetric microdilution panel for antifungal susceptibility testing of dermatophytes. J Clin Microbiol. 2002;40(7):2618–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Castro C, Serrano MC, Valverde A, Peman J, Almeida C, Martin-Mazuelos E. Comparison of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal panel with the modified Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute broth microdilution (M38-A) method for antifungal susceptibility testing of dermatophytes. Chemotherapy. 2008;54(6):427–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Mendez CC, Serrano MC, Valverde A, Peman J, Almeida C, Martin-Mazuelos E. Comparison of E-test, disk diffusion and a modified CLSI broth microdilution (M38-A) method for in vitro testing of itraconazole, fluconazole and voriconazole against dermatophytes. Med Mycol. 2008;46(2):119–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Nweze EI, Mukherjee PK, Ghannoum MA. Agar-based disk diffusion assay for susceptibility testing of dermatophytes. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(10):3750–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fungus Testing Laboratory, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA

    Nathan P. Wiederhold

Authors
  1. Nathan P. Wiederhold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nathan P. Wiederhold .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Univ Angers, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, CHU, SFR ICAT, Groupe d’Etude des Interactions Hôte-Pathogène (GEIHP, EA 3142), Angers, France

    Jean-Philippe Bouchara

  2. Laboratory for Medical Microbiology, Rötha, Sachsen, Germany

    Pietro Nenoff

  3. Mediprobe Research Inc., London, ON, Canada

    Aditya K. Gupta

  4. New York State Department of Health Wadsworth Center, Mycology Laboratory, Albany, NY, USA

    Vishnu Chaturvedi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wiederhold, N.P. (2021). Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Dermatophytes. In: Bouchara, JP., Nenoff, P., Gupta, A.K., Chaturvedi, V. (eds) Dermatophytes and Dermatophytoses. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-67421-2_19

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation