Silver(I) and Copper(II) complexes of 10-phenanthroline-5,6-dione inhibit Sporothrix brasiliensis azole-resistant clinical isolates


Abstract

Background: Sporothrix brasiliensis is the principal etiological agent responsible for cat-transmitted zoonotic sporotrichosis, which is currently the most prevalent mycosis in South America—especially in Brazil—and is increasingly being reported in other regions. While itraconazole is the standard treatment, its use is limited by hepatotoxicity, high cost, and emerging reports of reduced susceptibility. Complexes of 1,10-phenanthroline-5,6-dione (phendione) with transition metals have previously shown promise as antifungal agents against bacteria, parasites, yeasts, and filamentous fungi. This study investigates the in vitro and in vivo antifungal properties of [Cu(phendione)3](ClO4)2.4H2O (Cu-phendione) and [Ag(phendione)2]ClO4 (Ag-phendione) against S. brasiliensis isolates from domestic felines in endemic regions.

Methods: Six clinical isolates of S. brasiliensis obtained from cutaneous lesions in six felines with laboratory-confirmed sporotrichosis from hyperendemic regions in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, were investigated. Selection was made according to in vitro Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) response criteria for itraconazole (“wild type” WT = MIC ≤2 µg/mL; “non-wild type” NWT = MIC ≥4 µg/mL). The American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) S. brasiliensis MYA 4823 was included. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) and minimum fungicidal concentrations (MFCs) of phendione, its metal complexes, and simple silver and copper salts were evaluated against S. brasiliensis saprophytic and parasitic phases. Additionally, in vivo antifungal efficacy was assessed using Galleria mellonella larvae as a model.

Results: Both metal complexes exhibited low MIC and MFC values (0.3–5 µM) against conidia and yeast forms of both WT ("sensitive") and NWT ("resistant") S. brasiliensis clinical isolates. Notably, MFC values were equal to or at most twice the MICs, indicating a fungicidal profile, even against itraconazole-resistant strains. Ag-phendione and Cu-phendione demonstrated prolonged protective effects in G. mellonella larvae, extending from day 3 to days 7 and 8 of infection, respectively, and exhibited superior efficacy compared to itraconazole (p<0.001; Kaplan-Meier).

Discussion: Silver(I) and Copper(II) complexes of 10-phenanthroline-5,6-dione demonstrated both inhibitory and fungicidal activity against itraconazole-resistant S. brasiliensis isolates from diseased cats residing in the Brazilian hyperendemic region, highlighting their promise as novel antifungal agents. This finding is notable because drugs currently used for sporotrichosis treatment are characterized as fungistatic. This study provides data on alternative molecules that may be considered for future control of sporotrichosis, a zoonosis currently spreading throughout Latin America.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].