Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 170–175 | Cite as

Photodynamic inactivation of chlorin e6 with halogen light against dermatophytes

  • Ji-Hae Kim
  • Chung-Sub Han
  • Sung-Nam Chun
  • Mi-Young Lee
Research article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Photodynamic inactivation (PDI) combines a photosensitizer with light in the presence of oxygen, producing reactive oxygen species which will inactivate pathogens. The most common dermatophyte, named T. mentagrophytes, was known to cause various skin infections in human, such as dermatophytosis. In this study, the antifungal activity of chlorin e6-based PDI with halogen light for photodynamic inactivation against T. mentagrophytes was measured. We report for the first time that the chlorin e6-based PDI exhibited a significant antifungal activity against T. mentagrophytes. The use of chlorin e6 as an antifungal photosensitizer for PDI represents a prominent alternative method for treating fungal infections.

Keywords

T. mentagrophytes Chlorin e6 Photodynamic inactivation 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Donnelly, R. F., McCarron, P. A. & Tuney, M. M. Antifungal photodynamic therapy. Microbiol. Res. 163, 1–12 (2008).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kessel, D., Vicente, M. G. & Reiners J. J. Jr. Initiation of apoptosis and autophagy by photodynamic therapy. Lasers Surg. Med. 38, 482–488 (2006).PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, B. et al. The tumor affinity of chlorin e6 and its sonodynamic effects on non-small cell lung cancer. Ultrason Sonochem. 20, 667–673 (2013).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Isakau, H. A. et al. Toward understanding the high PDT efficacy of chlorin e6-polyvinylpyrrolidone formulations: Photophysical and molecular aspects of photosensitizer-polymer interaction in vitro. J. Photochem. Photobiol. B. 92, 165–174 (2008).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alexandra B. O. & Harold S. F. Dye sensitizers for photodynamic therapy. Materials. 6, 817–840 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Demidova, T. N. & Hamblin, M. R. Photodynamic therapy targeted to pathogens. Int. J. Immunopathol. Pharmacol. 17, 245–254 (2004).PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hamblin, M. R. & Hasan, T. Photodynamic therapy: a new antimicrobial approach to infectious disease? Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 3, 436–450 (2004).PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bertoloni, G., Reddi, E., Gatta, M., Burlini, C. & Jori, G. Factors influencing the haematoporphyrin-sensitized photoinactivation of Candida albicans. J. Gen. Microbiol. 135, 957–966 (1989).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Espinel-Ingroff, A. Novel antifungal agents, targets or therapeutic strategies for the treatment of invasive fungal disease: a review of the literature (2005–2009). Rev. Iberoam. Micol. 26, 15–22 (2009).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Groll, A. H. & Tragiannidis, A. Recent advances in antifungal prevention and treatment. Semin. Hematol. 46, 212–229 (2009).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee, M. H., Lee, K. B., Oh, S. M., Lee, B. H. & Chee, H. Y. Antifungal activities of dieckol isolated from the marine brown alga Ecklonia cava against Trichophyton rubrum. J. Korean Soc. Appl. Biol. Chem. 53, 504–507 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chinelli, P. A., Sofiatti Ade, A., Nunes, R. S. & Martin, J. E. Dermatophyte agents in the city of São Plaulo, from 1992 to 2002. Rev. Inst. Med. Trop. Sao. Paulo. 45, 259–263 (2003).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weitzman, I. & Summerbell, R. C. The dermatophytes. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 8, 240–259 (1995).PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Summerbell, R. C. Epidemiology and ecology of onychomycosis. Dermatology. 194, 32–36 (1997).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yu, A. R. et al. The antifungal activity of bee venom against dermatophytes. J. Appl. Biol. Chem. 55, 7–11 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ramage, G., Mowat, E., Jones, B., Williams, C. & Lopez-Ribot, J. Our current understanding of fungal biofilms. Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 35, 340–355 (2009).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pires, R. H. et al. Anticandidal efficacy of cinnamon oil against planktonic and biofilm cultures of Candida parapsilosis and Candida orthopsilosis. Mycopathologia. 172, 453–464 (2011).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pires, R. H., Santis, J. M., Zaja, J. E., Martins, C. H. & Mendes-Giannini, M. J. Candida parapsilosis complex water isolates from a haemodiaysis unit: biofilm production and in vitro evaluation of the use of clinical antifungals. Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz. 106, 646–654 (2011).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martins, M., Henriques, M., Lopez-Ribot, J. L. & Oliveira, R. Addition of DNase improves the in vitro activity of antifungal drugs against Candida albicans biofilms. Mycoses. 55, 80–85 (2012).PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sardi, J. C., Scorzoni, L., Bernardi, T., Fusco-Almeida, A. M. & Mendes Giannini, M. J. Candida species: current epidemiology, pathogenicity, biofilm formation, natural antifungal products and new therapeutic options. J. Med. Microbiol. 62, 10–24 (2013).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ajesh, K. & Sreejith, K. Cryptococcus laurentii biofilms: structure, development and antifungal drug resistance. Mycopathologia. 174, 409–419 (2012).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bojsen, R. K., Andersen, K. S. & Regenberg, B. Saccharomyces cerevisiae — a model to uncover molecular mechanisms for yeast biofilm biology. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 65, 169–182 (2012).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Muszkieta, L. et al. Investigation of Aspergillus fumigates bioflim formation by various “omics” approaches. Front Microbiol. 4, 13 (2013).PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Costa-Orlandi, C. B., Sardi, J. C., Santos, C. T., Fusco-Almeida, A. M. & Mendes-Giannini, M. J. In vitro characterization of Trichophyton rubrum and T. mentagrophytes biofilms. Biofouling. 30, 719–727 (2014).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vlassova, N., Han, A., Zenilman, J. M., James, G. & Lazarus, G. S. New horizons for cutanious microbiology: the role of biofilms in dermatological disease. Br. J. Dermatol. 165, 751–759 (2011).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gupta, A. K. & Del Rosso, J. Q. An evaluation of intermittent therapies used to treat onychomycosis and other dermatomycoses with the oral antifungal agents. Int. J. Dermatol. 39, 401–411 (2000).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hainer, B. L. Dermatophyte infections. Am. Fam. Physician. 67, 101–108 (2003).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nair, M. K. et al. Antibacterial effect of caprylic acid and monocaprylin on major bacterial mastitis pathogens. J. Dairy Sci. 88, 3488–3495 (2005).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pitkälä, A., Haveri, M., Pyörälä, S., Myllys, V. & Honkanen-Buzalski, T. Bovine mastitis in Finland 2001- pervalence, distribution of bacteria, and antimicrobial resistance. J. Dairy Sci. 87, 2433–2441 (2004).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pereira Gonzales, F. & Maisch, T. Photodynamic inactivation for controlling Candida albicans infections. Fungal. Biol. 116, 1–10 (2012).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Foote, C. S. Mechanisms of photosensitized oxidation. There are several different types of photosensitized oxidation which may be important in biological systems. Science. 162, 963–970 (1968).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Foote, C. S. Definition of type I and type II photosensitized oxidation. Photochem. Photobiol. 54, 659 (1991).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Roberts, D. T., Taylor, W. D. & Boyle, J. Guidelines for treatment of onychomycosis. Br. J. Dermatol. 148, 402–410 (2003).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Evans, E. G. The rationale for combination therapy. Br. J. Drmatol. 145, 9–13 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sigurgeirsson, B., Paul, C., Curran, D. & Evans, E. G. Prognostic factors of mycological cure following treatment of onychomycosis with oral antifungal agents. Br. J. Dermatol. 147, 1241–1243 (2002).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    da Silva Barros, M. E., de Assis Santos, D. & Hamdan, J. S. Evaluation of susceptibility of Trichophyton mentagrophytes and Trichophyton rubrum clinical isolates to antifungal drugs using a modified CLSI microdilution method (M38-A). J. Med. Microbiol. 56, 514–518 (2007).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Santos, D. A., Barros, M. E. & Hamdan, J. S. Establishing a method of inoculum preparation for susceptibility testing of Trichophyton rubrum and Trichophyton mentagrophytes. J. Clin. Microbiol. 44, 98–101 (2006).PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Environmental Risk Assessment and Health Science and Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ji-Hae Kim
    • 1
  • Chung-Sub Han
    • 2
  • Sung-Nam Chun
    • 2
  • Mi-Young Lee
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Medical ScienceSoonChunHyang UniversityAsan, ChungnamKorea
  2. 2.R&D CenterDong-Sung Bio Pharm Co. LtdAsan, ChungnamKorea
  3. 3.Departments of Medical BiotechnologySoonChunHyang UniversityAsan, ChungnamKorea

Personalised recommendations