Comparison of clinical and biological characteristics of HIV infected patients presenting Cryptococcus neorformans versus C. curvatus /C. laurentii meningitis
[en] Background: Cryptococcal meningitis is mainly caused by Cryptococcus neoformans/C. gattii complex. We compared the clinical, biological, and antifungal susceptibility profiles of isolates from HIV‑Infected Patients (HIVIP) with C. neoformans (Cn) versus C. curvatus/C. laurentii (Cc/Cl) meningitis. Methods: Comparative analytical study were conducted. Apart from patients’ clinical data, the following analysis were performed and the results were compared in both groups: biochemical examination, cryptococcal antigen test, India ink staining, and culture on Cerebral Spinal Fluid (CSF), strains identification by mass spectrometry, ITS sequencing, PCR serotyping and antifungal susceptibility. The main outcome variable was the “species of Cryptococcus identified”, which was compared to other variables of the same type using the Pearson Chi‑square test or the Fisher exact test. Results: A total of 23 (79.3%) Cn meningitis cases versus 6 (20.7%) Cc/Cl meningitis were retained. Cn meningitis was more frequently associated with headache (100% vs 50%, p = 0.005) than Cc/Cl meningitis and meningeal signs were more frequent in Cn infected patients. Biologically, hypoglycorrhachia and low CD4 count were more observed in Cn group (90% vs 20% of patients, p = 0.01; 45.6 vs 129.8 cells/µL, p = 0.02, respectively). A higher proportion of Cn strains (91.3%) showed a low Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) (< 8 mg/L) for fluconazole compared to Cc/Cl strains (66.7%). Also, Cc/Cl strains resistant to 5‑flucytosine and amphotericin B were found in 16.7% of cases for each of the two antifungal agents. Cryptococcus detection by routine analysis (India ink, culture, and antigens) was better for Cn samples than Cc/Cl. Except ITS sequencing, which identified all strains of both groups, mass spectrometry and serotyping PCR identified Cn strains better than Cc/Cl (100% vs 80%, p = 0.1; 100% vs 0%, p < 0.0001, respectively). After treatment with amphotericin B, 5‑flucytosine, and fluconazole in both groups, the outcome was similar. Conclusions: Clinical presentation of Cn meningitis is certainly more severe than that of Cc/Cl meningitis, but Cc/ Cl infection should be considered in the management of HIVIP with meningeal syndrome because of the diagnostic difficulty and the high MICs of antifungal agents required for the treatment of meningitis due to these cryptococcal species.
Research Center/Unit :
CIRM - Centre Interdisciplinaire de Recherche sur le Médicament - ULiège
Disciplines :
Laboratory medicine & medical technology Immunology & infectious disease
MOUTSCHEN, Michel ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Département de médecine interne > Service des maladies infectieuses - médecine interne
SACHELI, Rosalie ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Unilab > Laboratoire CNR
MUENDELE, Gaultier; Centre Hospitalier Mère et Enfant de NGABA > Médecine Interne > Prise en charge VIH
KABUTUTU, Pius; Université de Kinshasa > Sciences de base > Biologie Moléculaire
BIAKABUSWA, Adolphe; Centre Médical et évangélique Révérend LUYINDU > Médecine Interne > Prise en charge VIH
LANDU, Nicole; Centre Médical et évangélique Révérend LUYINDU > Médecine Interne > Prise en charge VIH
MVUMBI, Georges; Université de Kinshasa > Sciences de base > Biologie Moléculaire
Hayette, Marie-Pierre ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences biomédicales et précliniques > Bact., mycologie, parasitologie, virologie, microbio.
Language :
English
Title :
Comparison of clinical and biological characteristics of HIV infected patients presenting Cryptococcus neorformans versus C. curvatus /C. laurentii meningitis
Alternative titles :
[fr] Comparaison des caractéristiques cliniques et biologiques des personnes vivant avec le VIH présentant une méningite à Cryptococcus neoformans versus C. curvatus/C. laurentii
Kwon-Chung KJ, Varma A. Do major species concepts support one, two or more species within Cryptococcus neoformans? FEMS Yeast Res. 2006;6:574–87. DOI: 10.1111/j.1567-1364.2006.00088.x
Chen SCA, Korman TM, Slavin MA, Marriott D, Byth K, Bak N, et al. Antifungal therapy and management of complications of cryptococcosis due to Cryptococcus gattii. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57:543–51. DOI: 10.1093/cid/cit341
Khawcharoenporn T, Apisarnthanarak A, Mundy LM. Non-neoformans cryptococcal infections: a systematic review. Infection. 2007;35:51–8. DOI: 10.1007/s15010-007-6142-8
Johnson LB, Bradley SF, Kauffman CA. Fungaemia due to Cryptococcus laurentii and a review of non-neoformans cryptococcaemia. Mycoses. 1998;41:277–80. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0507.1998.tb00338.x
Thiru M, Sankh S, Rangaswamy V. Process for biodiesel production from Cryptococcus curvatus. Bioresour Technol. 2011;102:10436–40. 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.08.102. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.08.102
Nowicka J, Nawrot U, Haus O, Kuliczkowski K, Fonteyne PA, Nolard N. Cryptococcus curvatus in peritoneal fluid of gastric lymphoma patient with complex chromosome aberrations—case report. Mikol Lek. 2007;14:285–7.
Mccurdy LH, Billings FT. Infections due to non-neoformans cryptococcal species. Comp Ther. 2003;29:95–101. DOI: 10.1007/s12019-003-0012-9
Jacobs RM, Cochrane SM, Lumsden JH, Norris AM. Relationship of cerebrospinal fluid protein concentration determined by dye-binding and urinary dipstick methodologies. Can Vet J. 1990;31(8):587–8.
Ferrer C, Colom F, Frasés S, Mulet E, Abad JL, Alió JL. Detection and identification of fungal pathogens by PCR and by ITS2 and 5.8S ribosomal DNA typing in ocular infections. J Clin Microbiol. 2001;39:2873–9. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.39.8.2873-2879.2001
Ito-Kuwa S, Nakamura K, Aoki S, Vidotto V. Serotype identification of Cryptococcus neoformans by multiplex PCR. Mycoses. 2007;50:277–81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0507.2007.01357.x
Arendrup MC, Guinea J, Cuenca-Estrella M, Meletiadis J, Moutonn JW, Lagrou K, et al. Method for the determination of broth dilution minimum Inhibitory concentrations of antifungal agents for yeasts. Print Pap Eur. 2015;16:17.
Committee TE, Testing AS, Changes N, Pseudomonas E. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. 2015:0–77. http://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/Breakpoint_tables/v_5.0_Breakpoint_Table_01.pdf.
Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Boyken L, Rice C, Tendolkar S, Hollis RJ, et al. Global trends in the antifungal susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans (1990 to 2004). J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43:2163–7. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.5.2163-2167.2005
Temfack E, Boyer-Chammard T, Lawrence D, Delliere S, Loyse A, Lanternier F, et al. New insights into Cryptococcus spp. biology and Cryptococcal meningitis. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2019;19:81. DOI: 10.1007/s11910-019-0993-0
Kwon-Chung KJ, Fraser JA, Doering TL, Wang Z, Janbon G, Idnurm A, et al. Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii, the etiologic agents of cryptococcosis. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2014;4:a019760. 10.1101/cshperspect.a019760. DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a019760
Shankar EM, Kumarasamy N, Bella D, Renuka S, Kownhar H, Suniti S, et al. Pneumonia and pleural effusion due to Cryptococcus laurentii in a clinically proven case of AIDS. Can Respir J. 2006;13:275–8. DOI: 10.1155/2006/160451
Banerjee P, Haider M, Trehan V, Mishra B, Thakur A, Dogra V, et al. Cryptococcus laurentii Fungemia. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2013;31:75–7. DOI: 10.4103/0255-0857.108731
Calista F, Tomei F, Assalone P, Traficante D, Di Pilla G, Pepe C, et al. Cryptococcus laurentii Diarrhea in a Neoplastic Patient. Case Rep Oncol Med. 2015;2015 Figure 2:1–2.
Smith N, Sehring M, Chambers J, Patel P. Perspectives on non-neoformans cryptococcal opportunistic infections. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2017;7:214–7. 10.1080/20009666.2017.1350087. DOI: 10.1080/20009666.2017.1350087
Cano EJ, Yetmar ZA, Razonable RR. Cryptococcus species other than Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii: are they clinically significant? Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020;7:1–4.
Sugita T, Takashima M, Ikeda R, Nakase T, Shinoda T. Intraspecies diversity of Cryptococcus laurentii as revealed by sequences of internal transcribed spacer regions and 28S rRNA gene and taxonomic position of C. laurentii clinical isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38:1468–71. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.38.4.1468-1471.2000
Ferreira-Paim K, Andrade-Silva L, Mora DJ, Lages-Silva E, Pedrosa AL, da Silva PR, et al. Antifungal susceptibility, enzymatic activity, PCR-fingerprinting and ITS sequencing of environmental Cryptococcus laurentii isolates from Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Mycopathologia. 2012;174:41–52. DOI: 10.1007/s11046-011-9500-0
Ikeda R, Sugita T, Jacobson ES, Shinoda T. Laccase and melanization in clinically important. Society. 2002;40:1214–8.
Mocan H, Murphy A, Beattie T, McAllister T. Fungal peritonitis in cidldren on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Scot Med J. 1989;34:494–6. DOI: 10.1177/003693308903400404
Bernal-martinez L, Gomez-lopez A, Castelli MV, Mesa-arango ANAC, Zaragoza O, Rodriguez-tudela JL, et al. Susceptibility profile of clinical isolates of non-Cryptococcus neoformans/non-Cryptococcus gattii Cryptococcus species and literature review. Med Mycol. 2010;48:90–6. DOI: 10.3109/13693780902756073
World Health Organization. Guidelines for the diagnosis, prevention and management of cryptococcal disease in HIV-infected adults, adolescents and children, march 2018. Genève; 2018. http://www.who.int/fr.
Theophilo da Cunha JL. Cryptococcus albidus meningitis. South Med J. 1973;66(11):1230. DOI: 10.1097/00007611-197311000-00006