Synergistic effect of ibuprofen with itraconazole and fluconazole against Cryptococcus neoformans

Abstract

The present study investigated the association of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug ibuprofen with itraconazole, fluconazole and amphotericin B against Cryptococcus neoformans isolates. The minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) was found according to M27-A3 protocol and in vitro interactions were evaluated using checkerboard microdilution method. Synergism was demonstrated between azoles and ibuprofen for most isolates. However, no synergistic effects were seen when amphotericin B was combined with ibuprofen. Therefore, our results suggest that ibuprofen presents clinical potential when combined with azole drugs in the treatment of cryptococcosis.

Keywords:
Cryptococcus neoformans ; Ibuprofen; Itraconazole; Fluconazole; Synergism

INTRODUCTION

Opportunistic pathogenic fungi such as Candida, Aspergillus and Cryptococcus species are responsible for systemic infections affecting mainly immunodeficient patients such as neonates, transplanted and patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) (Grimaldi et al., 2010). Cryptococcosis is an infection mainly caused by encapsulated yeast fungus such as Cryptococcus neoformans. This microorganism is found in bird droppings and contaminated soil with higher prevalence in tropical and subtropical regions (Ramos-e-Silva et al., 2012). It has the airway as portal of entry causing pulmonary infection and can be disseminated to the brain resulting in severe meningoencephalitis (Prates et al., 2013; Chen et al., 2015). It is estimated that cryptococcal meningitis result in 120.000 to 240.000 deaths per year worldwide (Rajasingham et al., 2017).

The classical treatment of cryptococcosis is based on amphotericin B alone or combined with 5-fluorocytosine or azoles (Reichert-Lima et al. 2016; Rossato et al., 2016). However, amphotericin B formulations have restricted use due to nephrotoxicity problems and must be administered by intravenous infusion (Kagan et al., 2012; Xie et al., 2014; Lai et al., 2016); and 5-flucytosine is expensive and is not present in therapeutic protocols in several countries, making this combination difficult to administer, particularly in resource-poor settings (Smith et al., 2015; Lai et al., 2016). Fluconazole is cheap, safe, and easy to administer and is the drug of choice in maintenance therapy, typically after cerebrospinal fluid cultures are negative (Lai et al., 2016). Nonetheless, fluconazole monotherapy is not recommended because it has shown ineffectiveness due development of resistant strains (Gullo et al., 2013). Ttriazoles voriconazole and posaconazole are highly active in vitro but have unpredictable bioavailability and experience with their use for cryptococcosis is still lacking. Furthermore, echinocandins, has no useful activity against Cryptococcus (Chen et al., 2012). Thus, mortality remains high and there are still considerable rates of permanent neurological sequels including seizures, headache, memory loss, blindness, and personality disorders (Chen et al., 2012; Lai et al., 2016).

Currently few antifungals are commercially available and the development of new drugs does not accompany the high incidence of the development of resistant strains and the market needs (Liu et al., 2014). Combination therapy with two or more antifungals has the potential to reduce antifungal resistance and decrease toxicity of each drug, but its side effects should be evaluated with caution (Hatipoglu, Hatipoglu, 2013). Thus, in vitro association studies with non-antifungal agents and antifungal drugs have been performed and are still required to delineate in vivo assays and consequent clinical trials (Venturini et al., 2011; Hatipoglu, Hatipoglu, 2013). Ibuprofen is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug commonly used for its antipyretic, analgesic, and anti-inflammatory effects (Arai, Sugita, Nishikawa, 2005). Ibuprofen inhibits inflammation by suppressing cyclooxygenase 1 and 2 (COX-1 and COX-2) activity with subsequent inhibition of prostaglandin (PG) synthesis (Matos, Jordan, 2015). Ibuprofen is easily accessible because it is inexpensive and has shown synergistic effect when combined with fluconazole in Candida strains (Hatipoglu, Hatipoglu, 2013; Liu et al., 2014). So, the present study aims to test the association of ibuprofen with itraconazole, fluconazole and amphotericin B against C. neoformans isolates.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fungal strains

A total of twenty five clinical isolates of C. neoformans isolated from cerebrospinal fluid were included in this study. All isolates were previously confirmed by PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) using primers CNa-70S (5’-ATTGCGTCCACCAAGGAGCTC-3’) and CNa-70A (5’-ATTGCGTCCATGTTACGTGGC-3’). The isolates were provided by the Clinical Analysis Department of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS. All isolates were grown on Sabouraud dextrose agar at 35 ° C for 48 h prior to the experiments.

Drugs

The drugs were prepared according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) recommendations. Fluconazole (FLC) stock solution (Metrochem Api Private Limited, India) was prepared in distilled water. Ibuprofen (IBP; Sigma-Aldrich, USA), itraconazole (ITC; MetrochemApi Private Limited), and amphotericin B (AMB; MetrochemApi Private Limited) stock solution were prepared in dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO; Nuclear, Brazil). For the experiments, the compounds were diluted in Roswell Park Memorial Institute 1640 medium (RPMI 1640; Sigma-Aldrich) to obtain a maximum concentration of 2% DMSO.

Antifungal susceptibility testing

Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of IBP and antifungal agents were determined in duplicate by the broth microdilution method according to M27-A3 protocol (CLSI, 2008). Serial two-fold dilutions were made in RPMI 1640 medium (Sigma-Aldrich) buffered with morpholinepropansulfonic acid (MOPS; Sigma-Aldrich) and concentrations’ ranges tested were: 0.0312 - 16 µg/mL of ITC, 0.125 - 64 µg/mL of FLC, 0.0312 - 16 µg/mL of AMB and 1 - 512 µg/mL of IBP. The experiments were carried out in duplicate. MICs values were defined as the lowest concentration of compounds at which the microorganisms tested did not show visible growth (AMB) or reduced 50% of visible growth (FLC, IBP and ITC) in 72 h.

Checkerboard assay

The interaction between IBP and each antifungal was evaluated for eight randomly selected C. neoformans isolates using the checkerboard method (Johnson et al., 2004). The assay lead to forty nine different concentration combinations between IBP and antifungal agents in concentrations of MIC/8, MIC/4, MIC/2, MIC, MICx2, MICx4 and MICx8. The experiments were conducted in duplicate and incubated at 35°C for 72 h. The effect of the combinations was classified by determining the fractional inhibitory concentration index (FICI) expressed as the sum of the fractional inhibitory concentrations (FIC), as defined by the following equation:

$\mathrm{FICA}+\mathrm{FICB}=\mathrm{MICa}\mathrm{in}\mathrm{combination}\mathrm{MICA}\mathrm{tested}\mathrm{alone}+\mathrm{MICB}\mathrm{in}\mathrm{combination}\mathrm{MICBtested}\mathrm{alone}$

where MICA and MICB are the MICs of ibuprofen and antifungal agent, respectively (Mukherjee et al., 2005). Synersgim was defined when FICI ≤ 0.5, indifference when 0.5 < FICI ≤ 4 and antagonism when FICI > 4 (Odds, 2003).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

MIC values of each antifungal agents against twenty-five C. neoformans isolates were determined. MIC range, Geometric means (GM), MIC50 (MIC value which inhibits 50% of the isolates) and MIC90 (MIC value that inhibits 90% of the isolates) for itraconazole (ITC), fluconazole (FLC), amphotericin B (AMB) and ibuprofen (IBP) are presented in Table I. Standardizations of susceptibility tests for C. neoformans are less developed than for Candida spp.; so that, there are no breakpoints established. The isolates showed variable susceptibility to antifungal agents and isolates with low sensitivity were found. The isolates showed low MICs range for ITC (0.03125 - 1 µg/mL) compared to FLC (0.25 - 8 µg/mL) and AMB (0.5 - 16 µg/mL). The geometric mean of MIC was also lower for ITC (0.66 µg/mL) than for FLC (1.74 µg/mL) and AMB (6.17 µg/mL). Since IBP is not an antifungal and there is no standardization in relation to the evaluation of its inhibitory effect, we consider as MIC the concentration that reduces 50% fungal growth. Based on the high MICs, the non-antifungal agent showed weak antifungal activity against C. neoformans.

TABLE I
Susceptibility profile of twenty five isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans to antifungal agents. Rresults were expressed in ranges of variation of minimum inhibitory concentrations values (MIC ranges), geometric mean (GM) of 25 isolates, MIC50 (MIC value that inhibits 50% of the isolates) and MIC90 (MIC value that inhibits 90% of the isolates)

Agents	MIC range (µg/mL)	GM (µg/mL)	MIC50 (µg/mL)	MIC90 (µg/mL)
Itraconazole (ITC)	0.03125 - 1	0.66	1	1
Fluconazole (FLC)	0.25 – 8	1.74	2	4
Amphotericin B (AMB)	0.5 – 16	6.17	4	16
Ibuprofen (IBP)	128 - 512	319.57	256	512

Table II presents the effects of antifungal agent combination, which demonstrated synergism or indifference. The combination of azoles (ITC and FLC) with IBP resulted predominantly in synergism, which was detected in 75% of isolates for combination with FLC and in 62% of isolates for combination with ITC. On the other hand, AMB associated with IBP resulted in 100% of indifference against C. neoformans. Antagonism was not detected against both groups. MIC for AMB combined with IBP was chosen when fungal growth was reduced in 100%.

TABLE II
In vitro susceptibility of Cryptococcus neoformans to ibuprofen (IBR) combined with itraconazole (ITC), fluconazole (FLC) and amphotericin B (AMB)

Isolate	MIC (µg/mL)					IBP + FLC MIC combination (µg/mL)					IBP + ITC MIC combination (µg/mL)					IBP + AMB MIC combination (µg/mL)
	IBP	FLC	ITC	AMB		IBP	FLC	FICI	Interaction		IBP	ITC	FICI	Interaction		IBP	AMB	FICI	Interaction
CN06	512	4	0.25	2		8	1	0.26	Syn		256	0.0625	0.5	Syn		8	2	1.01	Ind
CN07	512	8	0.5	2		128	0.25	0.25	Syn		8	0.25	0.52	Ind		16	2	1.03	Ind
CN10	512	2	0.25	2		64	0.5	0.375	Syn		64	0.03125	0.25	Syn		512	1	1.5	Ind
CN11	512	4	0.5	4		8	2	0.52	Ind		16	0.125	0.28	Syn		256	2	1	Ind
CN17	512	4	0.25	0.5		8	1	0.27	Syn		8	0.125	0.52	Ind		256	0.25	1	Ind
CN19	512	4	0.5	2		64	1	0.38	Syn		8	0.125	0.27	Syn		512	1	1.5	Ind
CN24	256	4	0.25	4		4	1	0.26	Syn		64	0.125	0.75	Ind		512	2	2.5	Ind
CN25	512	2	0.25	2		256	0.5	0.75	Ind		128	0.0625	0.5	Syn		256	0.25	0.63	Ind

• Syn = Synergism
• Ind = Indifferent

The limited efficacy and the difficulty to introduce new antifungal drugs into the market make the drugs association an important therapeutic strategy to treat potentially life-threatening invasive fungal infections (Fuentefria et al., 2018). Previous studies have detected synergism between IBP and azole against C. albicans (Ricardo et al., 2009; Costa-de-Oliveira et al., 2015; Sharma et al., 2015) and C. neoformans (Ogundeji, Pohl, Sebolai, 2016) increasing the susceptibility of the isolates to these antifungal agents, and corroborating with research. Other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, such as tenoxicam, diclofenac sodium and sodium salicylate have also shown synergistic effect when combined with azoles (Yücesoy, Oktem, Güllay, 2000). However, studies are commonly performed with Candida species.

Several mechanisms may be involved in the selection of azole resistant strains, such as mutations causing structural changes in enzyme affinity, overproduction of enzymes and overexpression of efflux pumps (Gullo et al., 2013). Efflux pumps are transporter proteins present in the plasma membrane and are involved in the removal of azoles from the cytoplasm. When efflux pumps are overexpressed there is expulsion of the drug out of the cell reducing the drug concentration at the action site. These mechanisms are responsible for Cryptococcus resistance against most azoles (Basso Jr et al., 2015).

Understanding the resistance mechanisms of azoles and the action of IBP helps to explain our findings of in vitro synergy. IBP is an efflux pump blocker and can prevent the output of azole from the fungal cell. Thus, the high susceptibility of cells to IBP + azoles association may be attributed to the increase in intracellular concentration of the antifungal (Pina-Vaz et al., 2005). On the other hand, AMB does not require internalization into fungal cells for exerting their antifungal activity and so they escape from efflux systems (Vandeputte, Ferrari, Coste, 2012). This may justify the indifferent effect of IBP + AMB association found in the present study.

Besides, previous studies showed that IBP causes fungal membrane damage and can be considered, depending on the dose, fungicide or fungistatic (Argenta et al., 2012; Arai, Sugita, Nishikawa, 2005). Our results corroborate these studies, since IBP alone was able to inhibit cell growth of C. neoformans isolates. The anti-inflammatory effect of IBP can also be relevant in the treatment of fungal infections, since prostaglandins may be involved in fungal colonization’s and its anti-inflammatory mechanism works mostly by inhibiting cyclooxygenase isoenzymes (Rusu et al., 2014).

In addition to the advantageous effects mentioned above, IBP has a good record of efficacy and safety, and thus it is the most commonly used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. It can be used even for the most vulnerable patient populations. Furthermore, pharmacokinetic studies of ibuprofen showed that it penetrates into the cerebrospinal fluid, which may be advantageous in treatments of cryptococcal meningitis (Bannwarth et al., 1995; Kokki et al., 2007). Thus, IBP may improve the action of azoles and may still present clinical benefits due to anti-inflammatory action and its favorable pharmacokinetics.

CONCLUSION

The results of this present study suggest that the combination of IBP and azole drugs may be suitable for cryptococcosis therapy since synergism was demonstrated. Further in vivo studies in clinical situations are still required to prove the effects of the combination of ibuprofen and azoles antifungals.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To the Department of Analysis of the Faculty of Pharmacy of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil, for the possibility of carrying out the present study.

REFERENCES

• Arai R, Sugita T, Nishikawa A. Reassessment of the in vitro synergistic effect of fluconazole with the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agent ibuprofen against Candida albicans Mycoses. 2005;48(1):38-41.
• Argenta JS, Alves SH, Silveira, Maboni G, Zanette, RA, Cavalheiro AS, et al. In vitro and in vivo susceptibility of two-drug and three-drug combinations of terbinafine, itraconazole, caspofungin, ibuprofen and fluvastatin against Pythium insidiosum Vet Microbiol. 2012;157(1-2):137-142.
• Bannwarth B, Lapicque F, Pehourcq F, Gillet P, Schaeverbeke T, Laborde C, et al. Stereoselective disposition of ibuprofen enantiomers in human cerebrospinal fluid. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1995;40(3):266-269.
• Basso Jr, LR, Gast CE, Bruzual I, Wong B. Identification and properties of plasma membrane azole efflux pumpsfrom the pathogenic fungi Cryptococcus gattii and Cryptococcus neoformans J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70(5):1396-1407.
• Chen CH, Chang CC, Chang WN, Tsai NW, Lui CC, Lin WC, et al. Neuro-psychological sequelae in HIV-negative cryptococcal meningitis after complete anti-fungal treatment. Acta Neurol Taiwan. 2012;21(1):8-17.
• Chen S, Yan H, Zhang L, Kong W, Sun Y, Zhang W, et al. Cryptococcus neoformans. infectionand immune cell regulation in human monocytes. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2015;37(2):537-547.
• Clinical And Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Reference Method for Broth Dilution Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Yeasts; Approved Standard - Third Edition. CLSI Document M27-A3. Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA, USA; 2008.
• Costa-de-Oliveira S, Miranda IM, Silva-Dias A, Silva AP, Rodrigues AG, Pina-Vaza C. Ibuprofen potentiates the in vivo antifungal activity of fluconazole against candida albicans murine infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(7):4289-92.
• Fuentefria AM, Pippi B, Dalla Lana DF, Doanto KK, De Andrade SF. Antifungals discovery: an insight into new strategies to combat antifungal resistance. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2018;66(1):2-13.
• Grimaldi M, De Rosa M, Di Marino S, Scrima M, Posteraro B, Sanguinetti M, et al. Synthesis of new antifungal peptides selective against Cryptococcus neoformans Bioorg Med Chem. 2010;18(22):7985-7990.
• Gullo FP, Rossi SA, Sardi J, Teodoro VLI, Mendes-Giannini MJS, Fusco-Almeida AM Cryptococcosis: epidemiology, fungal resistance, and new alternatives for treatment. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2013;32(11):1377-1391.
• Hatipoglu N, Hatipoglu H. Combination antifungal therapy for invasive fungal infections in children and adults. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2013;11(5):523-535.
• Johnson M, Macdougall C, Ostrosky-Zeichner L, Perfect J, Rex J. Combination antifungal therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48(3):693-715.
• Kagan S, Ickowicz D, Shmuel M, Altschuler Y, Sionov E, Pitusi M, et al. Toxicity mechanisms of amphotericin B and its neutralization by conjugation with arabinogalactan. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(11):5303-5611.
• Kokki H, Kumpulainen E, Lehtonen M, Laisalmi M, Heikkinen M, Savolainen J, Rautio J. Cerebrospinal fluid distribution of ibuprofen after intravenous administration in children. Pediatrics. 2007;120(4):e1002-8.
• Lai YW, Campbell LT, Wilkins MR, Pang CN, Chen S, Carter DA. Synergy and antagonism between iron chelators and antifungal drugs in Cryptococcus. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2016;48(4):388-94.
• Liu S, Houb Y, Chenc X, Gaoa Y, Li H, Sund S. Combination of fluconazole with non-antifungal agents: A promising approach to cope with resistant Candida albicans infections and insight into new antifungal agent discovery. Int J Antimicrob. 2014;43(5):395-402.
• Matos P, Jordan P. Beyond COX-inhibition: ‘side-effects’ of ibuprofen on neoplastic development and progression. Curr Pharm Des. 2015;21(21):2978-2982.
• Mukherjee PK, Sheehan DJ, Hitchcock CA, Ghannoum MA. Combination treatment of invasive fungal infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2005;18(1):163-194.
• Odds FC. Synergy, antagonism, and what the chequerboard puts between them. J Antimicrob Chemother . 2003;52(1):1.
• Ogundeji AO, Pohl CO, Sebolai OM. Repurposing of aspirin and ibuprofen as candidate anti-cryptococcus drugs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(8):4799-4808.
• Pina-Vaz C, Rodrigues AG, Costa-De-Oliveira S, Ricardo E, Mardh PA. Potent synergic effect between ibuprofen and azoles on Candida resulting from blockade of efflux pumps as determined by FUN-1 staining and flow cytometry. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;56(4):678-685.
• Prates RA, Fuchs BB, Mizuno K, Naqvi Q, Kato IK, Ribeiro MR, et al. Effect of virulence factors on the photodynamic inactivation of Cryptococcus neoformans PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54387.
• Rajasingham R, Smith RM, Park BJ, Jarvis JN, Govender NP, Chiller TM, et al. Global burden of disease of HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis: an updated analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(8):873-881.
• Ramos-e-Silva M, Lima CMO, Schechtman RC, Trope BM, Carneiro S. Systemic mycoses in immunodepressed patients (AIDS). Clin Dermatol. 2012;30(6):616-627.
• Reichert-Lima F, Busso-Lopes AF, Lyra L, Haddad Peron I, Taguchi H, Mikami Y, et al. Evaluation of antifungal combination against Cryptococcus spp. Mycoses. 2016;59(9):585-593.
• Ricardo E, Costa-de-Oliveira S, Silva Dias A, Guerra J, Gonçalves Rodrigues A, Pina-Vaz, C. Ibuprofen reverts antifungal resistance on Candida albicans showing overexpression of CDR genes. FEMS Yeast Res. 2009;9(4):618-625.
• Rossato L, Loreto ÉS, Zanette RA, Chassot F, Santurio JM, Alves SH. In vitro synergistic effects of chlorpromazine and sertraline in combination with amphotericin B against Cryptococcus neoformans var. grubii Folia Microbiol. 2016;61(5):399-403.
• Rusu E, Radu-Popescu M, Pelinescu D, Vassu T. Treatment with some anti-inflammatory drugs reduces germ tube formationin Candida albicans strains. Braz J Microbiol. 2014;45(4):1379-1383.
• Sharma M, Biswas D, Kotwal A, Thakuria B, Kakati B, Chauhan BS, Patras A. Ibuprofen-mediated reversal of fluconazole resistance in clinical isolates of Candida J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9(1):DC20-DC22.
• Smith KD, Achan B, Hullsiek K, McDonald TR, Okagaki LH, Alhadab AA, et al.. Increased antifungal drug resistance in clinical isolates of Cryptococcus neoformans in Uganda. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(12):7197-7204.
• Vandeputte P, Ferrari S, Coste AT. Antifungal resistance and new strategies to control fungal infections. Int J Microbiol. 2012;2012:713687.
• Venturini TP, Rossato L, Spader TB, Tronco-Alves GR, Azevedo MI, Weiler CB, et al. In vitro synergisms obtained by amphotericin B and voriconazole associated with non-antifungal agents against Fusarium spp. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;71(2):126-130.
• Xie, JL, Polvi1 E, Shekhar-Guturja T, Cowen L. Elucidating drug resistance in human fungal pathogens. Future Microbiol. 2014;9(4):523-542.
• Yücesoy M, Oktem IM, Gülay Z. In-vitro synergistic effect of fluconazole with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents against Candida albicans strains. J Chemother. 2000;12(5):385-389.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  18 Sept 2020
• Date of issue
  2020

History

• Received
  07 Aug 2018
• Accepted
  17 Oct 2018