Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: Scedosporium and Lomentospora species are intrinsically resistant moulds increasingly implicated in invasive infections. Olorofim, a novel orotomide antifungal, has demonstrated potent activity against several moulds. This study evaluated the antifungal susceptibility of clinical and environmental isolates, focusing on olorofim, and examined these data in a phylogenetic context. METHODS: A total of 216 isolates (Scedosporium spp., n = 205; L. prolificans, n = 11) were collected from clinical and environmental sources across Taiwan. Antifungal susceptibility was determined using the CLSI M38-A3 method. Correlation analyses assessed cross-resistance patterns, while phylogenetic signal, Mantel tests, and variance partitioning were used to evaluate evolutionary structuring of MICs. RESULTS: Scedosporium apiospermum (46.3%) and S. boydii (15.7%) were the predominant species, exhibiting comparable triazole susceptibility profiles (MIC90: voriconazole 1-2 mg/L, posaconazole 4 mg/L, and isavuconazole 8 mg/L). L. prolificans displayed pan-resistance to all agents except olorofim. Olorofim exhibited the lowest MICs across Scedosporium spp. and L. prolificans (all MIC90 ≤ 0.12 mg/L). The isolate source exerted limited biological impact on antifungal susceptibility campared with species-specific characteristics. The association between antifungal susceptibility and species relatedness varied by drug: moderate for posaconazole, amphotericin B, and voriconazole; intermediate for olorofim; weak for isavuconazole; and absent for itraconazole. The majority of MIC variability (72.5%-89.2%) was observed within rather than between species. CONCLUSIONS: Susceptibility in Scedosporium and Lomentospora exhibits high intraspecies variability. Triazoles showed only moderate phylogenetic conservation and cross-resistance, whereas olorofim demonstrated potent, independent activity across all taxa. Given the limited predictive value of species identity, individual susceptibility testing remains essential.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: