Next Article in Journal
Molecular Epidemiology of Aspergillus fumigatus in Chronic Pulmonary Aspergillosis Patients
Next Article in Special Issue
Mycotic Keratitis—A Global Threat from the Filamentous Fungi
Previous Article in Journal
Transcriptome Profiles of Sporisorium reilianum during the Early Infection of Resistant and Susceptible Maize Isogenic Lines
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Endemic and Other Dimorphic Mycoses in The Americas

1
Mycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA
2
Department of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Medical Center and Center of Expertise in Mycology Radboudumc/Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, 6525 Nijmegen, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Submission received: 29 December 2020 / Revised: 17 February 2021 / Accepted: 17 February 2021 / Published: 20 February 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Emerging and Endemic Mycoses)

Abstract

:
Endemic fungi are thermally dimorphic fungi that have a limited geographic range and can cause both primary disease and opportunistic infections. The Americas are home to more genera of endemic fungi than anywhere else on earth. These include Coccidioides, Histoplasma, Blastomyces, Paracoccidioides, and Sporothrix. Endemic fungi are found across the Americas and the Caribbean, from Blastomyces gilchristi, which extends into the northeast corners of North America, to Histoplasma capsulatum, which occurs all the way down in the southern regions of South America and into the Caribbean Islands. Symptoms of endemic fungal infection, when present, mimic those of many other diseases and are often diagnosed only after initial treatment for a bacterial or viral disease has failed. Endemic fungi place a significant medical burden on the populations they affect, especially in immunocompromised individuals and in resource-limited settings. This review summarizes the ecology, geographical range, epidemiology, and disease forms of the endemic fungi found in the Americas. An emphasis is placed on new and proposed taxonomic changes, including the assignment of new species names in Histoplasma, Blastomyces, and Paracoccidioides.

1. Introduction

The Americas contain the largest number of dimorphic endemic fungal species, including Coccidioides species, Histoplasma capsulatum, Blastomyces species, Paracoccidioides species, and Sporothrix species. The endemic fungi are so named because they have regional endemicity rather than being cosmopolitan like most fungi. They also share the trait of being thermally dimorphic, growing as a mold in the environment at temperatures below 37 °C and as a yeast [or spherule in the case of Coccidioides] in the host. Unlike most other fungal pathogens, which primarily infect people with weakened immune systems, the endemic fungi can act as primary pathogens and cause infections in people with intact immune systems. Conidia for all the endemic fungi are present intermittently in their respective endemic areas, but environmental disruption is often a key factor in their dispersal and likelihood of causing infection. Because endemic fungi are rarely cultured from environmental specimens, much remains unknown about their environmental niches and geographic ranges.
Signs and symptoms of endemic fungal diseases can be nonspecific and similar to those of other respiratory diseases, particularly other types of pneumonia [1]. Therefore, laboratory testing is needed to detect these fungal diseases. However, low healthcare provider awareness, lack of clear diagnostic guidance, unavailability of diagnostic testing in some areas, and the fact that some fungal diagnostic test results can be challenging to interpret all suggest that these diseases are likely widely underdiagnosed. The lack of comprehensive surveillance for most of these diseases also means that they are underreported to public health authorities, leaving a gap in our understanding of their true burden.
In this review, we summarize the taxonomy, ecology, geographic range, clinical features, and epidemiology of Coccidioides species, Histoplasma capsulatum, Blastomyces species, Paracoccidioides species, and Sporothrix species in the Americas.

2. Coccidioides Species

Coccidioidomycosis, also known as valley fever, is a potentially serious fungal infection caused by two closely related fungi, Coccidioides immitis and Coccidioides posadasii. Infection is generally acquired by inhaling airborne asexual spores, arthroconidia, present in dust and soil [2]. Approximately 15,000 cases of coccidioidomycosis are reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) each year, but the estimated number of infections could be 6 to 14 times greater than the number of reported cases [3]. Approximately 60% of infected persons remain asymptomatic or develop mild symptoms, and the remaining 40% develop serious infection that often requires hospitalization [4]. Most serious cases manifest as severe pneumonia, and the infection can also disseminate to other organs. Mild cases are usually self-resolving and do not require treatment, whereas moderate and severe cases are treated with antifungals. The most dangerous manifestation of coccidioidomycosis is fungal meningitis, which is a potentially fatal disease that requires lifelong antifungal treatment [5].
Coccidioides species are found in regions with hot arid climates characterized by a prolonged dry season, with a short period of monsoon rains, and populated by the plant and animal communities belonging to the Lower Sonoran Life Zone [6]. For reasons not entirely understood, Coccidioides species are restricted to the American continents; most cases reported from other parts of the world are linked to travel to the Americas [7]. The ecological niche of these fungi is poorly understood. For a long time, Coccidioides was assumed to be a soil saprotroph [8]. However, recent genomic analysis identified amplification of gene families responsible for protein degradation [9], and environmental sampling identified a close association of this fungus with rodent habitats, which led to the hypothesis that Coccidioides sp. may depend on an animal host for propagation [10]. The role of desert animals and other ecological factors in the life cycle of Coccidioides is being investigated by several groups [11,12]. A better understanding of the ecological niche is important for understanding the current distribution and modeling the future expansion of this fungus.
C. immitis was divided into two closely related species, C. immitis and C. posadasii, in 2002 based on microsatellite marker analysis later confirmed by population genetics studies using whole-genome sequencing data [13,14,15]. In the United States, Coccidioides was historically believed to be restricted to the southwestern states. However, in the last two decades, Coccidioides has been found outside of these areas. For example, in 2001, an outbreak of coccidioidomycosis was reported among persons working at an archeological site in Dinosaur National Monument in northeastern Utah, and in 2014, DNA of both C. posadasii and C. immitis was detected in soils collected from this site [16]. In 2010, three cases of coccidioidomycosis were reported in southeastern Washington State in people without travel history in the known endemic areas [17], and in 2014, C. immitis was detected in soil at the potential exposure site by PCR and culture [18]. Whole-genome sequencing confirmed genetic identity between isolates from the patient and soil, confirming the presence of C. immitis in this area [18]. Since then, several locally acquired cases have been reported in Washington each year [19,20]. Notably, whole-genome sequencing of clinical and environmental isolates from Washington State detected an unusually close genomic relationship among isolates from different cases, which is indicative of the recent introduction of this fungus into this region [19]. Molecular evolutionary analysis estimates the introduction of C. immitis into Washington State in the last 100 years [13].
Aside from the newly identified endemic areas in Washington state, C. immitis primarily lives in California’s southern Central Valley. In contrast, C. posadasii lives in Arizona, Texas, and other southwestern states with a similar climate, as well as in Mexico and parts of Central and South America [4]. Over most of their ranges, the two species are genetically and geographically distinct, although both are found in Baja California, Mexico. Limited evidence of genetic introgression between the two species has been detected with genomic analysis [21]. While C. immitis and C. posadasii have distinctly different geographic ranges, no data exist to suggest that they cause disparate syndromes. Identification of Coccidioides to the species level is useful for epidemiological purposes, but it may not play a role in the course of treatment. Identification as Coccidioides species or C. immitis/posadasii is sufficient in the clinical microbiology laboratory (Table 1).
Habitat modeling is a useful tool for improving our understanding of the current and potential future distribution of coccidioidomycosis. Several predictive models show the likely expansion of suitable habitats for Coccidioides due to rising temperatures, which could lead to the spread of this fungus north and east of the current endemic areas [22,23,24,25,26]. The recent discoveries of Coccidioides sp. in Washington State and Utah support this prediction. Although the prevalence of coccidioidomycosis outside the United States is poorly understood, the same ecological and economic factors likely responsible for increasing incidence and geographic expansion of Coccidioides in the United States are likely affecting C. posadasii populations in Central and South America [27]. More research and better surveillance are needed to understand and deal with the emergence of this pathogen.
Maps that accurately depict the geographic distribution of Coccidioides sp. are essential for raising awareness among healthcare providers and the general public about the possibility of contracting coccidioidomycosis based on residence in or travel to certain geographic locations. Increased awareness among clinicians and the public can lead to faster diagnosis and treatment initiation [28,29]. The original and widely used maps describing the distribution of this fungus were drawn in the 1940s and were recently updated in 2020 [30].
In the United States, coccidioidomycosis is under public health surveillance in 26 states. In the last decade, the number of reported cases has increased [31,32]. The reasons for this recent increase are not well understood but could include increased awareness and improved diagnostics, rising temperatures, severe droughts, and increased urbanization [33,34]. Typically, Arizona reports the most coccidioidomycosis cases of any state. However, in 2018, California reported more cases for the first time since public health surveillance for coccidioidomycosis began [35].

3. Histoplasma Species

Histoplasmosis is caused by fungi in the genus Histoplasma [36]. Histoplasma was discovered and named in the Americas in 1906 by a clinician performing autopsies on patients presumed to have died of malaria in the Panama Canal Zone. It was incorrectly described as an encapsulated protozoon inside the cytoplasm of histiocytes, hence the name Histoplasma capsulatum [37]. Infection caused by Histoplasma begins in the lungs and can range from asymptomatic infection or localized nodules to mild respiratory symptoms to fulminant disseminated disease. Although Histoplasma is a primary pathogen and can cause infection in immunocompetent people, it is an AIDS-defining illness, especially in Latin America [38]. A common factor in Histoplasma outbreaks is aerosolization of spores after environmental disruption, often involving bird or bat guano [39]. Sporadic cases of histoplasmosis also occur and may also involve these types of exposures, though some cases are not clearly associated with a specific activity or source [40].
Histoplasma is endemic throughout the Americas, but the regions of endemicity are not clearly defined and may be larger than has been assumed in the past [30]. Within the United States, histoplasmosis is traditionally described as being endemic to the Ohio and Mississippi River valleys based on nationwide skin test surveys conducted during the late 1940s and early 1950s [41,42,43]. While histoplasmosis appears most commonly throughout the central and eastern United States, public health surveillance data and environmental modeling suggest an expanding focus of histoplasmosis to the northern parts of the United States [44,45]. Isolated case reports in humans and animals also suggest the potential for histoplasmosis to occur outside the traditionally described areas [46]. Based on these lines of evidence, CDC recently updated its map of the estimated range of Histoplasma, showing that Histoplasma is likely to live throughout most of the eastern half of the country and that it can potentially live throughout the western half of the country [30]. In Canada, Histoplasma is associated with the St. Lawrence River Valley in Ontario and Quebec, but it may be more widely distributed to the west [30,47,48]. Histoplasma is endemic throughout most of Latin America, the exceptions being the western half of Mexico and the western edge of South America, including coastal Peru and most of Chile [30]. Histoplasma lives throughout much of the Caribbean, and outbreaks have been reported with activities such as cave exploring on several islands [30,49,50] (Table 1).
A more comprehensive and detailed understanding of the geographic distribution of histoplasmosis could be made possible by additional environmental modeling studies and by improved public health surveillance. Currently, histoplasmosis is a reportable disease in only 12 U.S. states, which do not include certain states within the areas traditionally considered to be at the highest risk. In states where histoplasmosis is reportable, surveillance detects fewer than 1000 cases per year, whereas national hospital discharge data show that over 5000 histoplasmosis-related hospitalizations occur annually [44,51]. The difference between these two counts suggests that substantial under-reporting is occurring in the United States.
Recently, attempts have been made to define clades or cryptic species within Histoplasma capsulatum, aside from the Africa-associated Histoplasma duboisii and Histoplasma farciminosum, recognized as only causing disease in horses [52,53]. Kasuga and colleagues used multilocus sequence typing (MLST) to divide Histoplasma into eight clades, four of which were represented in the Americas [54]. Teixeira and colleagues expanded the MLST over a larger set of isolates and identified two clusters in the United States that likely represented unique species and four populations in Latin America that likely represented separate species [55]. In 2017, whole-genome sequencing was applied to multiple members of the genus Histoplasma for the first time, and four species were identified: H. capsulatum sensu stricto was restricted to isolates coming from Panama, the original site of discovery; Histoplasma mississippiense and Histoplasma ohiense represented the isolates from North America, but definitive geographic boundaries were not defined; and Histoplasma suramericanum represented the isolates from South America [56]. While the data supporting the division of H. capsulatum in the Americas into four distinct clades/species were compelling, the species designations did not strictly follow the rules of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature and are currently considered to be invalid [57].
The division of Histoplasma in the Americas into separate clades or species is currently based on phylogenetic information only. No significant differences in the clinical course of infection have been described. As all species cause the same disease, differentiation of the species in the clinical laboratory may be useful for epidemiological purposes, but it does not contribute to the clinical course of treatment. Even if new names for the well-defined clades are established, a designation of Histoplasma species or Histoplasma capsulatum species complex will suffice for patient care.
Countries of the Americas have the goal of eliminating HIV as a public health problem by 2030 [58]. In Latin America, histoplasmosis is one of the most prevalent opportunistic infections affecting people living with HIV (PLHIV), with a high mortality rate of up to 30% [59,60]. A 2012 study estimated 6710 to 15,657 cases of histoplasmosis among PLHIV in Latin America each year [61]. In some countries, the prevalence and mortality associated with histoplasmosis are estimated to be equivalent to or higher than that of tuberculosis [62], indicating that histoplasmosis could be responsible for a significant proportion of the deaths each year in a few Latin American countries [62].
Some progress has been recently achieved, including the publication of World Health Organization (WHO)/Pan American Health Organization guidelines for diagnosis and management of disseminated histoplasmosis in PLHIV, the development, validation, and commercial availability of kits for rapid detection of Histoplasma antigen in human specimens, and the inclusion of commercially available diagnostic assays in the second WHO model list of essential in vitro diagnostics [63,64,65,66].

4. Blastomyces Species

Blastomycosis is a disease caused by fungi in the genus Blastomyces [67]. As with Histoplasma and Coccidioides, inhalation of conidia is the predominant mode of infection. More than 90% of the clinical cases are primary pulmonary infections, although many cases are asymptomatic [68,69]. Hematologic dissemination occurs in up to a quarter of symptomatic patients, and primary sites of dissemination include the skin, bone, genitourinary system, and central nervous system [70].
In a large study of blastomycosis patients in Wisconsin, hospitalization was two to three times more likely in Hispanic whites, American Indian/Alaska Natives (AI/AN), and Asians than for non-Hispanic whites, even though the former groups tended to be younger and healthier [71]. This is consistent with other reports showing unusually high case numbers among the Hmong ethnic group in Wisconsin and higher rates and mortality among blacks in Illinois and Missouri [72,73,74].
In the Americas, Blastomyces is endemic only to North America [30]. The known geographic range extends from the east coast of the United States [not including southern Florida] to the Mississippi River drainage in the west and from the gulf coast all the way into Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan, Canada to the north [30]. Ecological niche modeling of Blastomyces around human and canine cases in Wisconsin identified proximity to waterways and moist soil were more predictive than soil characteristics, and one of the largest recorded outbreaks of blastomycosis occurred among boaters on the Little Wolf River [75,76]. Range expansion to the north has been spurred by case reports and case series in regions previously thought to be outside of the endemic zone [77,78,79] (Table 1).
Given the imprecise geographic range and the nonspecific signs and symptoms, misdiagnosis is a consistent problem with blastomycosis, which often leads to delays in appropriate treatment and increased mortality [69,78,79,80,81,82]. In a recent case series from New York, a newly defined endemic region, most cases were initially misdiagnosed as malignancy or a viral or bacterial infection [78].
Phylogenetic analysis of six genetically distinct loci has divided Blastomyces into two species, Blastomyces dermatitidis and Blastomyces gilchristii [83]. B. gilchristii appears to live primarily in the northern portion of the Blastomyces range around Wisconsin, Minnesota, and into Ontario, Canada. Interestingly, in a large case study of 477 patients in Wisconsin, 90% of the B. dermatitidis infections were among non-Hispanic whites, whereas the cases among Hispanic whites, Asians, and AI/AN were B. gilchristii [71]. In work that preceded the new nomenclature, B. gilchristii was more likely to cause pulmonary infection alone, whereas B. dermatitidis was more likely to cause disseminated infection [84]. Despite these differences, there are no recommendations for differential treatment of blastomycosis based on species, and the current Infectious Diseases Society of America treatment guidelines precede the discovery of the two distinct species. As for Histoplasma and Coccidioides, there are currently no clinical reasons for distinguishing between the two species of Blastomyces, but that may change as we learn more about the differences between them [85].
A new species, Blastomyces helicus, has been described from the Western United States and Canada [86]. This species was identified from sequence data of isolates identified as either Blastomyces or Emmonsia that came from the western United States and Canada, outside of the typical range of Blastomyces. Data are limited, but cases seem to occur mainly in immunocompromised persons and domestic animals (e.g., cats and dogs). The clinical course seems to be more severe than for B. dermatitidis or B. gilchristii. B. helicus can be distinguished from the other two species by histopathology, as the yeast cells tend to form chains and branches of elongate cells rather than round budding cells [86].

5. Paracoccidioides Species

Paracoccidioidomycosis (PCM) is caused by fungi in the genus Paracoccidioides, which are endemic in Latin America. The environmental reservoir of Paracoccidioides is unknown, but inhalation of contaminated soil or dust is believed to be the predominant mode of infection [87]. In adults, PCM begins as a pneumonitis but spreads through the lymphatic system to the lymph nodes, where it often forms granulomas and can become a continuous latent infection. A decrease in immunocompetency can lead to reactivation and hematogenous dissemination to multiple organs. Initial symptoms of reactivation are vague but consist of general malaise, anorexia, and weight loss. The chronic form is generally limited to lesions in the lung, oral mucosa, and on the skin around the mouth and nose. In children and young adults, a subacute infection can occur with symptoms of lymphadenomegaly, hepatosplenomegaly, and lesions of the skin and oral mucosa.
Paracoccidioides ranges from southern Mexico to northern Argentina. Although the northeastern limits of the range are Colombia and Venezuela, most cases (up to 80%) are recorded from south and southeast Brazil and northward [88]. The prevalence of PCM is low, with a range from 0.3–3 cases per 100,000 population in countries where the disease is endemic [87,89]. PCM is relatively uncommon in children, and the majority (~85%) of PCM cases occur in adults [87,89]. Active disease is more frequently observed in post-pubescent males than females (ratio of 13:1); estrogens, 17 beta-estradiol, confer disease protection in sexually mature women [90,91]. However, paracoccidioidin intradermal reactivity shows similar results between males and females [92]. Because it occurs most often in resource-limited settings and mimics tuberculosis in symptoms and course of infection, PCM is likely under-recorded [93] (Table 1).
The incubation period is highly variable, ranging from 1 month to decades. PCM cases diagnosed outside the endemic regions have been linked with prior visits to endemic regions [94,95]. Specific environmental characteristics associated with PCM cases include altitude from 1000 to 1499 m above sea level, annual rainfall from 2000 to 2999 mm, and the presence of humid forests and coffee and tobacco crops [96,97]. PCM is considered an occupational disease, as most cases occur among farmers and other persons regularly exposed to soil [98]. PCM outbreaks are rare but have been linked with occupational activities, for example, the construction of a highway in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Clusters have also been associated with the El Niño–Southern Oscillation climatic anomaly [99,100,101].
In 2014, Teixeira and colleagues used phylogenetic and morphologic analysis to separate isolates of Paracoccidioides from central and northern Brazil into the new species Paracoccidioides lutzii [102]. Although data suggest that the two species exhibit some differences in clinical course, there are no guidelines to suggest differential treatment. Identification of species is ideal for epidemiologic purposes, but for the clinical microbiology laboratory, a designation of Paracoccidioides species is sufficient for the initiation of optimal therapy.
In 2017, Turissini and coworkers used phylogenic data derived from multiple gene sequences as well as microsatellites to divide P. brasiliensis into four separate species; Paracoccidioides americana, Paracoccidioides restrepiensis, Paracoccidioides venezuelensis, and Paracoccidioides brasiliensis sensu stricto [103]. Although the phylogenetic data strongly suggest that the complex contains multiple species, the names are currently considered invalid due to not following the conventions of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature [104].

6. Sporothrix Species

Sporotrichosis is a disease caused by fungi in the Sporothrix schenkii species complex, the most common species being S. schenkii sensu stricto [105]. Sporothrix as a genus is cosmopolitan and not truly endemic, but it shares the common trait of thermal dimorphism with the endemic fungi. The most common mode of infection is traumatic inoculation and is associated with contaminated plant debris, especially sphagnum moss [105]. Infection is generally a benign subcutaneous infection with lymphatic spread. In the United States, sporotrichosis appears to be most common in the south and south-central states but is a rare disease overall, with a rate of 2 cases per million population in a large nationwide sample of persons with commercial insurance [106]. As most patients with sporotrichosis presumably do not require hospitalization, sporotrichosis-associated hospitalizations are also uncommon, with an average annual rate of 0.35 hospitalizations per million persons during 2000–2013 and no apparent temporal trend during this time frame [107].
Comprehensive epidemiologic data about sporotrichosis in the United States are incomplete, and most information comes from outbreak investigations. These outbreaks have been primarily associated with sphagnum moss used in topiaries or as packing material for tree seedlings and with hay bales [108,109,110,111,112]. For unclear reasons, no published literature has described a U.S. sporotrichosis outbreak investigation since the late 1990s [108]. A true absence of sporotrichosis outbreaks in the last 30 years might reflect industry changes in harvesting or processing of plant materials most often associated with these outbreaks. Another explanation is that sporotrichosis is likely widely under-recognized since no routine public health surveillance exists for it. Therefore, our understanding of the true burden of sporotrichosis in the United States remains limited.
Sporothrix brasiliensis is both endemic and emerging. S. brasiliensis differs from other species within the S. schenkii species complex in that it is not acquired from the environment but rather almost exclusively through interactions with infected cats. S. brasiliensis is currently endemic primarily in Brazil, but there are some data indicating that S. brasiliensis cases are emerging in surrounding countries [113]. In humans, the disease is similar to that caused by S. schenkii sensu stricto, but is more likely to present with a papule or ulcer at the site of infection. Symptoms are similar in cats with ulcerated lesions, enlarged lymph nodes, and sometimes respiratory symptoms. The first outbreak of cat-transmitted S. brasiliensis disease was detected in 1998 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil [113]. By 2020, cases of cat-transmitted sporotrichosis caused by S. brasiliensis have been reported in most coastal Brazilian states [113]. In Brazil, 4188 human cases were reported from 1997 to 2011, and 4703 cat cases were diagnosed through 2015, with a few additional cases in dogs [114,115,116]. As many infected cats are never captured and diagnosed, and symptoms in humans are not severe, the burden is likely much higher than reported. Confirmed cases of feline sporotrichosis caused by S. brasiliensis have been reported from Argentina, with outbreaks among humans in the Buenos Aires Province, and the El Calafate City, Santa Cruz Province, Southern Patagonia, and Paraguay, where cases were linked with sick cats introduced from Brazil [117,118,119].
S. brasiliensis has produced a significant increase in the incidence of zoonotic infection in humans and domestic animals [e.g., cats and dogs] in the last 20 years, alarming public health authorities across the Americas. In August 2019, the Pan American Health Organization released a regional alert on S. brasiliensis [120].

7. Conclusions

Endemic and other dimorphic fungi are present throughout much of the Americas. These fungi are a serious public health concern because they can be difficult to prevent, often present with symptoms that mimic those of other infections, and can be challenging to diagnose. In addition, endemic fungal diseases can cause severe infections in both previously healthy hosts and in persons with weakened immune systems, particularly due to advanced HIV disease. Avoiding endemic fungi in the natural environment is challenging. Therefore, prevention efforts are best directed at increasing awareness among healthcare providers and the public, encouraging patients to seek medical care, and helping clinicians order appropriate testing to enable faster diagnosis and treatment.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.R.L.; investigation, S.R.L., M.T., K.B., D.H.C., and A.P.L.; writing—original draft preparation, S.R.L.; writing—review and editing, S.R.L., M.T., K.B., D.H.C., and A.P.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The findings and the conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

References

  1. Benedict, K.; Kobayashi, M.; Garg, S.; Chiller, T.; Jackson, B.R. Symptoms in blastomycosis, coccidioidomycosis, and histoplasmosis versus other respiratory illnesses in commercially insured adult outpatients, United States, 2016–2017. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Brown, J.; Benedict, K.; Park, B.J.; Thompson, G.R., III. Coccidioidomycosis: Epidemiology. Clin. Epidemiol. 2013, 5, 185. [Google Scholar]
  3. Freedman, M.; Anderson, S.; Benedict, K.; McCotter, O.; Derado, G.; Hoekstra, R. Preliminary estimates of annual burden of coccidioidomycosis in the United States, 2010–2014. In Proceedings of the 7th International Coccidioidomycosis Symposium, Stanford, CA, USA, 10–13 August 2017. [Google Scholar]
  4. McCotter, O.Z.; Benedict, K.; Engelthaler, D.M.; Komatsu, K.; Lucas, K.D.; Mohle-Boetani, J.C.; Oltean, H.; Vugia, D.; Chiller, T.M.; Sondermeyer Cooksey, G.L.; et al. Update on the epidemiology of coccidioidomycosis in the United States. Med. Mycol. 2019, 57 (Suppl. 1), S30–S40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Galgiani, J.N.; Ampel, N.M.; Blair, J.E.; Catanzaro, A.; Johnson, R.H.; Stevens, D.A.; Williams, P.L.; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Coccidioidomycosis. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2005, 41, 1217–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Fisher, F.S.; Bultman, M.W.; Johnson, S.M.; Pappagianis, D.; Zaborsky, E. Coccidioides niches and habitat parameters in the southwestern United States. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2007, 1111, 47–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Liang, G.; Shen, Y.; Lv, G.; Zheng, H.; Mei, H.; Zheng, X.; Kong, X.; Blechert, O.; Li, D.; Liu, W. Coccidioidomycosis: Imported and possible domestic cases in China: A case report and review, 1958–2017. Mycoses 2018, 61, 506–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ajello, L. Comparative ecology of respiratory mycotic disease agents. Bacteriol. Rev. 1967, 31, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sharpton, T.J.; Stajich, J.E.; Rounsley, S.D.; Gardner, M.J.; Wortman, J.R.; Jordar, V.S.; Maiti, R.; Kodira, C.D.; Neafsey, D.E.; Zeng, Q.; et al. Comparative genomic analyses of the human fungal pathogens Coccidioides and their relatives. Genome Res. 2009, 19, 1722–1731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Taylor, J.W.; Barker, B.M. The endozoan, small-mammal reservoir hypothesis and the life cycle of Coccidioides species. Med. Mycol. 2019, 57 (Suppl. 1), S16–S20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kollath, D.R.; Teixeira, M.M.; Funke, A.; Miller, K.J.; Barker, B.M. Investigating the role of animal burrows on the ecology and distribution of Coccidioides spp. in Arizona Soils. Mycopathologia 2020, 185, 145–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Lauer, A.; Baal, J.D.; Mendes, S.D.; Casimiro, K.N.; Passaglia, A.K.; Valenzuela, A.H.; Guibert, G. Valley fever on the Rise—Searching for microbial antagonists to the fungal pathogen Coccidioides immitis. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Engelthaler, D.M.; Roe, C.C.; Hepp, C.M.; Teixeira, M.; Driebe, E.M.; Schupp, J.M.; Gade, L.; Waddell, V.; Komatsu, K.; Arathoon, E.; et al. Local population structure and patterns of western hemisphere dispersal for Coccidioides spp., the fungal cause of valley fever. mBio 2016, 7, e00550-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Teixeira, M.M.; Barker, B.M. Use of population genetics to assess the ecology, evolution, and population structure of Coccidioides. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2016, 22, 1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Fisher, M.C.; Koenig, G.L.; White, T.J.; Taylor, J.W. Molecular and phenotypic description of Coccidioides posadasii sp. nov., previously recognized as the Non-California population of Coccidioides immitis. Mycologia 2002, 94, 73–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Johnson, S.M.; Carlson, E.L.; Fisher, F.S.; Pappagianis, D. Demonstration of Coccidioides immitis and Coccidioides posadasii DNA in soil samples collected from Dinosaur National Monument, Utah. Med. Mycol. 2014, 52, 610–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Marsden-Haug, N.; Goldoft, M.; Ralston, C.; Limaye, A.P.; Chua, J.; Hill, H.; Jecha, L.; Thompson, G.R., 3rd; Chiller, T. Coccidioidomycosis acquired in Washington state. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2013, 56, 847–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Litvintseva, A.P.; Marsden-Haug, N.; Hurst, S.; Hill, H.; Gade, L.; Driebe, E.M.; Ralston, C.; Roe, C.; Barker, B.M.; Goldoft, M.; et al. Valley fever: Finding new places for an old disease: Coccidioides immitis found in Washington State soil associated with recent human infection. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2015, 60, e1–e3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  19. Oltean, H.N.; Etienne, K.A.; Roe, C.C.; Gade, L.; McCotter, O.Z.; Engelthaler, D.M.; Litvintseva, A.P. Utility of whole-genome sequencing to ascertain locally acquired cases of coccidioidomycosis, Washington, USA. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2019, 25, 501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Oltean, H.N.; Springer, M.; Bowers, J.R.; Barnes, R.; Reid, G.; Valentine, M.; Engelthaler, D.M.; Toda, M.; McCotter, O.Z. Suspected locally acquired coccidioidomycosis in human, Spokane, Washington, USA. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2020, 26, 606–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Maxwell, C.S.; Mattox, K.; Turissini, D.A.; Teixeira, M.M.; Barker, B.M.; Matute, D.R. Gene exchange between two divergent species of the fungal human pathogen, Coccidioides. Evolution 2019, 73, 42–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Kolivras, K.N.; Comrie, A.C. Modeling valley fever (Coccidioidomycosis) incidence on the basis of climate conditions. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2003, 47, 87–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Baptista-Rosas, R.C.; Hinojosa, A.; Riquelme, M. Ecological niche modeling of Coccidioides spp. in western North American deserts. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2007, 1111, 35–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gorris, M.; Cat, L.; Zender, C.; Treseder, K.; Randerson, J. Coccidioidomycosis dynamics in relation to climate in the southwestern United States. Geohealth 2018, 2, 6–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Coopersmith, E.; Bell, J.; Benedict, K.; Shriber, J.; McCotter, O.; Cosh, M.H. Relating coccidioidomycosis [valley fever] incidence to soil moisture conditions. Geohealth 2017, 1, 51–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Weaver, E.; Kolivras, K.N.; Thomas, R.Q.; Thomas, V.A.; Abbas, K.M. Environmental factors affecting ecological niche of Coccidioides species and spatial dynamics of valley fever in the United States. Spat. Spatio Temporal Epidemiol. 2020, 32, 100317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Toda, M.; Gonzalez, F.J.; Fonseca-Ford, M.; Franklin, P.; Huntington-Frazier, M.; Gutelius, B.; Kawakami, V.; Lunquest, K.; McCracken, S.; Moser, K.; et al. Notes from the field: Multistate Coccidioidomycosis outbreak in U.S. residents returning from community service trips to Baja, California, Mexico—July–August 2018. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 2019, 68, 332–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tartof, S.Y.; Benedict, K.; Xie, F.; Rieg, G.K.; Yu, K.C.; Contreras, R.; Truong, J.; Fong, K.; Tseng, H.F.; Jaconsen, S.J.; et al. Testing for Coccidioidomycosis among community-acquired pneumonia patients, Southern California, USA. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2018, 24, 779–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hurd-Kundeti, G.; Sondermeyer Cooksey, G.L.; Jain, S.; Vugia, D.J. Valley Fever (Coccidioidomycosis) Awareness—California, 2016–2017. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 2020, 69, 1512–1516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ashraf, N.; Kubat, R.C.; Poplin, V.; Adenis, A.A.; Denning, D.W.; Wright, L.; McCotter, O.; Schwartz, I.S.; Jackson, B.R.; Chiller, T.; et al. Re-Drawing the maps for endemic mycoses. Mycopathologia 2020, 185, 843–865. [Google Scholar]
  31. Cooksey, G.S.; Nguyen, A.; Knutson, K.; Tabnak, F.; Benedict, K.; McCotter, O.; Jain, S.; Vugia, D. Notes from the field: Increase in Coccidioidomycosis—California, 2016. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 2017, 66, 833–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Benedict, K.; McCotter, O.Z.; Brady, S.; Komatsu, K.; Sondermeyer Cooksey, G.L.; Nguyen, A.; Jain, S.; Vugia, D.; Jackson, B.R. Surveillance for Coccidioidomycosis—United States, 2011–2017. Morbidity and mortality weekly report surveillance summaries [Washington, DC, 2002]. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 2019, 68, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  33. Colson, A.J.; Vredenburgh, L.M.; Guevara, R.E.; Rangel, N.P.; Kloock, C.T.; Lauer, A. Large-Scale land development, fugitive dust, and increased coccidioidomycosis incidence in the Antelope Valley of California, 1999–2014. Mycopathologia 2016, 182, 439–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Pearson, D.; Ebisu, K.; Wu, X.; Basu, R. A review of coccidioidomycosis in California: Exploring the intersection of land use, population movement, and climate change. Epidemiol. Rev. 2019, 41, 145–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Valley Fever (Coccidioidomycosis) Statistics. 2020. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/fungal/diseases/coccidioidomycosis/statistics.html (accessed on 18 November 2020).
  36. Kauffman, C.A. Histoplasmosis: A clinical and laboratory update. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2007, 20, 115–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Darling, S. A protozoon general infection producing pseudotubercles in the lungs and focal necroses in the liver, spleen, and lymph nodes. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1906, 46, 1283–1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Nacher, M.; Adenis, A.; Mc Donald, S.; Do Socorro Mendonca Gomes, M.; Singh, S.; Lopes Lima, I.; Malcher Leite, R.; Hermelijn, S.; Wongsokarijo, M.; Van Eer, M.; et al. Disseminated histoplasmosis in HIV-Infected patients in South America: A neglected killer continues on its rampage. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2013, 7, e2319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Benedict, K.; Mody, R.K. Epidemiology of histoplasmosis outbreaks, United States, 1938–2013. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2016, 22, 370–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. Benedict, K.; McCracken, S.; Signs, K.; Ireland, M.; Amburgey, V.; Serrano, J.A.; Christophe, N.; Gibbons-Burgener, S.; Hallyburton, S.; Warren, K.A.; et al. Enhanced surveillance for histoplasmosis-9 States, 2018–2019. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2020, 7, ofaa343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Edwards, L.B.; Acquaviva, F.A.; Livesay, V.T.; Cross, F.W.; Palmer, C.E. An atlas of sensitivity to tuberculin, PPD-B, and histoplasmin in the United States. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 1969, 99, 1–132. [Google Scholar]
  42. Palmer, C.E. Geographic differences in sensitivity to histoplasmin among student nurses. Public Health Rep. 1946, 61, 475–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Manos, N.E.; Ferebee, S.H.; Kerschbaum, W.F. Geographic variation in the prevalence of histoplasmin sensitivity. Dis. Chest 1956, 29, 649–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Armstrong, P.A.; Jackson, B.R.; Haselow, D.; Fields, V.; Ireland, M.; Austin, C.; Signs, K.; Fialkowski, V.; Patel, R.; Ellis, P.; et al. Multistate epidemiology of histoplasmosis, United States, 2011–2014. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2018, 24, 425–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Maiga, A.W.; Deppen, S.; Scaffidi, B.K.; Baddley, J.; Aldrich, M.C.; Dittus, R.S.; Grogan, E.L. Mapping Histoplasma capsulatum exposure, United States. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2018, 24, 1835–1839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Benedict, K.; Thompson, G.R., 3rd; Deresinski, S.; Chiller, T. Mycotic infections acquired outside areas of known endemicity, United States. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2015, 21, 1935–1941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Dufresne, S.F.; Cole, D.C.; Denning, D.W.; Sheppard, D.C. Serious fungal infections in Canada. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2017, 36, 987–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Brown, E.M.; McTaggart, L.R.; Dunn, D.; Pszczolko, E.; Tsui, K.G.; Morris, S.K.; Stephens, D.; Kus, J.V.; Richardson, S.E. Epidemiology and geographic distribution of blastomycosis, histoplasmosis, and coccidioidomycosis, Ontario, Canada, 1990–2015. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2018, 24, 1257–1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Sénéchal, A.; Ferry, T.; Boibieux, A.; Brion, J.P.; Epaulard, O.; Chidiac, C.; Peyramond, D. Imported pulmonary histoplasmosis in three French cavers after a trip to Cuba. J. Travel Med. 2012, 19, 64–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Armstrong, P.A.; Beard, J.D.; Bonilla, L.; Arboleda, N.; Lindsley, M.D.; Chae, S.R.; Castillo, D.; Nuñez, R.; Chiller, T.; de Perio, M.A.; et al. Outbreak of severe histoplasmosis among tunnel Workers-Dominican Republic, 2015. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2018, 66, 1550–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Benedict, K.; Derado, G.; Mody, R.K. Histoplasmosis-Associated hospitalizations in the United States, 2001–2012. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2016, 3, ofv219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Gabal, M.A.; Hassan, F.K.; Siad, A.A.; Karim, K.A. Study of equine histoplasmosis farciminosi and characterization of Histoplasma farciminosum. Sabouraudia 1983, 21, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Develoux, M.; Amona, F.M.; Hennequin, C. Histoplasmosis caused by Histoplasma capsulatum var. duboisii: A comprehensive review of cases from 1993 to 2019. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kasuga, T.; White, T.J.; Koenig, G.; McEwen, J.; Restrepo, A.; Castañeda, E.; Da Silva Lacaz, C.; Heins-Vaccari, E.M.; De Freitas, R.S.; Zancopé-Oliveira, R.M.; et al. Phylogeography of the fungal pathogen Histoplasma capsulatum. Mol. Ecol. 2003, 12, 3383–3401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Teixeira, M.M.; Patané, J.S.; Taylor, M.L.; Gómez, B.L.; Theodoro, R.C.; de Hoog, S.; Engelthaler, D.M.; Zancopé-Oliveira, R.M.; Felipe, M.S.S.; Barker, B.M. Worldwide phylogenetic distributions and population dynamics of the genus Histoplasma. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2016, 10, e0004732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Sepúlveda, V.E.; Márquez, R.; Turissini, D.A.; Goldman, W.E.; Matute, D.R. Genome sequences reveal cryptic speciation in the human pathogen Histoplasma capsulatum. mBio 2017, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Index Fungorum Histoplasma ohiense. 2020. Available online: http://www.indexfungorum.org/names/NamesRecord.asp?RecordID=823361 (accessed on 18 November 2020).
  58. Plan of Action for the Prevention and Control of HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infections 2016–2021. Available online: http://iris.paho.org/xmlui/handle/123456789/34081 (accessed on 18 November 2020).
  59. Nacher, M.; Leitao, T.S.; Gomez, B.L.; Couppie, P.; Adenis, A.; Damasceno, L.; Demar, M.; Samayoa, B.; Cáceres, D.H.; Pradinaud, R.; et al. The fight against HIV-Associated disseminated histoplasmosis in the Americas: Unfolding the different stories of four centers. J. Fungi 2019, 5, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Cáceres, D.H.; Gómez, B.L.; Restrepo, Á.; Tobón, Á.M. Histoplasmosis y sida: Factores de riesgo clínicos y de laboratorio asociados al pronóstico de la enfermedad. Infectio 2012, 16, 44–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Adenis, A.A.; Valdes, A.; Cropet, C.; McCotter, O.Z.; Derado, G.; Couppie, P.; Chiller, T.; Nacher, M. Burden of HIV-Associated histoplasmosis compared with tuberculosis in Latin America: A modelling study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2018, 18, 1150–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Adenis, A.A.; Nacher, M.; Hanf, M.; Basurko, C.; Dufour, J.; Huber, F.; Aznar, C.; Carme, B.; Couppie, P. Tuberculosis and histoplasmosis among human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients: A comparative study. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2014, 90, 216–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)/World Health Organization (WHO). Guidelines for Diagnosing and Managing Disseminated Histoplasmosis among People Living with HIV. 2020. Available online: https://iris.paho.org/bitstream/handle/10665.2/52304/9789275122495_eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 10 November 2020).
  64. Caceres, D.H.; Gomez, B.L.; Tobon, A.M.; Chiller, T.M.; Lindsley, M.D. Evaluation of a Histoplasma antigen lateral flow assay for the rapid diagnosis of progressive disseminated histoplasmosis in Colombian patients with AIDS. Mycoses 2019, 63, 139–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Caceres, D.H.; Samayoa, B.E.; Medina, N.G.; Tobon, A.M.; Guzman, B.J.; Mercado, D.; Restrepo, A.; Chiller, T.; Arathoon, E.E.; Gomez, B.L. Multicenter validation of commercial antigenuria reagents to diagnose progressive disseminated histoplasmosis in people living with HIV/AIDS in two Latin American Countries. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2018, 56, e01959-17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. World Health Organization [WHO]. Second WHO Model List of Essential In Vitro Diagnostics. 2019. Available online: https://www.who.int/medical_devices/publications/Standalone_document_v8.pdf?ua=1 (accessed on 18 November 2020).
  67. Schwartz, I.S.; Kauffman, C.A. Blastomycosis. Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2020, 41, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Lemos, L.B.; Baliga, M.; Guo, M. Blastomycosis: The great pretender can also be an opportunist. Initial clinical diagnosis and underlying diseases in 123 patients. Ann. Diagn. Pathol. 2002, 6, 194–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ireland, M.; Klumb, C.; Smith, K.; Scheftel, J. Blastomycosis in Minnesota, USA, 1999–2018. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2020, 26, 866–875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. McBride, J.A.; Gauthier, G.M.; Klein, B.S. Clinical manifestations and treatment of blastomycosis. Clin. Chest Med. 2017, 38, 435–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Anderson, J.L.; Frost, H.M.; King, J.P.; Meece, J.K. Racial differences in clinical phenotype and hospitalization of blastomycosis patients. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2019, 6, ofz438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Roy, M.; Benedict, K.; Deak, E.; Kirby, M.A.; McNiel, J.T.; Sickler, C.J.; Eckardt, E.; Marx, R.K.; Heffernan, R.T.; Meece, J.K.; et al. A large community outbreak of blastomycosis in Wisconsin with geographic and ethnic clustering. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2013, 57, 655–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Cano, M.V.; Ponce-de-Leon, G.F.; Tippen, S.; Lindsley, M.D.; Warwick, M.; Hajjeh, R.A. Blastomycosis in Missouri: Epidemiology and risk factors for endemic disease. Epidemiol. Infect. 2003, 131, 907–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Dworkin, M.S.; Duckro, A.N.; Proia, L.; Semel, J.D.; Huhn, G. The epidemiology of blastomycosis in Illinois and factors associated with death. Clin. Infect. Dis. Off. Publ. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am. 2005, 41, e107–e111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Thompson, K.; Sterkel, A.K.; Brooks, E.G. Blastomycosis in Wisconsin: Beyond the outbreaks. Acad. Forensic Pathol. 2017, 7, 119–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Reed, K.D.; Meece, J.K.; Archer, J.R.; Peterson, A.T. Ecologic niche modeling of Blastomyces dermatitidis in Wisconsin. PLoS ONE 2008, 3, e2034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Monaco, W.E.; Batsis, J.A. A case of disseminated blastomycosis in Vermont. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2013, 75, 423–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Austin, A.; Tobin, E.; Judson, M.A.; Hage, C.A.; Hu, K.; Epelbaum, O.; Fantauzzi, J.; Jones, D.M.; Gilroy, S.; Chopra, A. Blastomycosis in the capital district of New York State: A newly identified emerging endemic area. Am. J. Med. 2020, 134, e101–e108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Bethuel, N.W.; Siddiqui, N.; Edmonds, L. Pulmonary blastomycosis in rural Upstate New York: A case series and review of literature. Ann. Thorac. Med. 2020, 15, 174–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Arora, K.; Dawkins, R.L.; Bauer, D.F.; Palmer, C.A.; Hackney, J.R.; Markert, J.M. Intracranial blastomycotic abscess mimicking malignant brain neoplasm: Successful treatment with voriconazole and surgery. Surg. Neurol. Int. 2015, 6, 174. [Google Scholar]
  81. Lohrenz, S.; Minion, J.; Pandey, M.; Karunakaran, K. Blastomycosis in Southern Saskatchewan 2000–2015: Unique presentations and disease characteristics. Med. Mycol. 2018, 56, 787–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Alpern, J.D.; Bahr, N.C.; Vazquez-Benitez, G.; Boulware, D.R.; Sellman, J.S.; Sarosi, G.A. Diagnostic delay and antibiotic overuse in acute pulmonary blastomycosis. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2016, 3, ofw078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  83. Brown, E.M.; McTaggart, L.R.; Zhang, S.X.; Low, D.E.; Stevens, D.A.; Richardson, S.E. Phylogenetic analysis reveals a cryptic species Blastomyces gilchristii, sp. nov. within the human pathogenic fungus Blastomyces dermatitidis. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e59237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  84. Meece, J.K.; Anderson, J.L.; Gruszka, S.; Sloss, B.L.; Sullivan, B.; Reed, K.D. Variation in clinical phenotype of human infection among genetic groups of Blastomyces dermatitidis. J. Infect. Dis. 2013, 207, 814–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  85. Chapman, S.W.; Dismukes, W.E.; Proia, L.A.; Bradsher, R.W.; Pappas, P.G.; Threlkeld, M.G.; Kauffman, C.A.; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of blastomycosis: 2008 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2008, 46, 1801–1812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Schwartz, I.S.; Wiederhold, N.P.; Hanson, K.E.; Patterson, T.F.; Sigler, L. Blastomyces helicus, a New Dimorphic Fungus Causing Fatal Pulmonary and Systemic Disease in Humans and Animals in Western Canada and the United States. Clin. Infect. Dis. Off. Publ. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am. 2019, 68, 188–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  87. Queiroz-Telles, F.; Fahal, A.H.; Falci, D.R.; Caceres, D.H.; Chiller, T.; Pasqualotto, A.C. Neglected endemic mycoses. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2017, 17, e367–e377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Brummer, E.; Castaneda, E.; Restrepo, A. Paracoccidioidomycosis: An update. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 1993, 6, 89–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Colombo, A.L.; Tobon, A.; Restrepo, A.; Queiroz-Telles, F.; Nucci, M. Epidemiology of endemic systemic fungal infections in Latin America. Med. Mycol. 2011, 49, 785–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  90. Restrepo, A.; Salazar, M.E.; Cano, L.E.; Stover, E.P.; Feldman, D.; Stevens, D.A. Estrogens inhibit mycelium-to-yeast transformation in the fungus Paracoccidioides brasiliensis: Implications for resistance of females to paracoccidioidomycosis. Infect. Immun. 1984, 46, 346–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Shankar, J.; Restrepo, A.; Clemons, K.V.; Stevens, D.A. Hormones and the resistance of women to paracoccidioidomycosis. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2011, 24, 296–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  92. Restrepo, A.; Robledo, M.; Ospina, S.; Restrepo, M.; Correa, A. Distribution of paracoccidioidin sensitivity in Colombia. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1968, 17, 25–37. [Google Scholar]
  93. Griffiths, J.; Lopes Colombo, A.; Denning, D.W. The case for paracoccidioidomycosis to be accepted as a neglected tropical (fungal) disease. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2019, 13, e0007195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Ajello, L.; Polonelli, L. Imported paracoccidioidomycosis: A public health problem in non-endemic areas. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 1985, 1, 160–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Bethlem, E.P.; Capone, D.; Maranhao, B.; Carvalho, C.R.; Wanke, B. Paracoccidioidomycosis. Curr. Opin. Pulm. Med. 1999, 5, 319–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Calle, D.; Rosero, D.S.; Orozco, L.C.; Camargo, D.; Castaneda, E.; Restrepo, A. Paracoccidioidomycosis in Colombia: An ecological study. Epidemiol. Infect. 2001, 126, 309–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Restrepo, A.; McEwen, J.G.; Castaneda, E. The habitat of Paracoccidioides brasiliensis: How far from solving the riddle? Med. Mycol. 2001, 39, 233–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  98. Martinez, R. New trends in paracoccidioidomycosis epidemiology. J. Fungi 2017, 3, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  99. Barrozo, L.V.; Benard, G.; Silva, M.E.; Bagagli, E.; Marques, S.A.; Mendes, R.P. First description of a cluster of acute/subacute paracoccidioidomycosis cases and its association with a climatic anomaly. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2010, 4, e643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Barrozo, L.V.; Mendes, R.P.; Marques, S.A.; Benard, G.; Silva, M.E.; Bagagli, E. Climate and acute/subacute paracoccidioidomycosis in a hyper-endemic area in Brazil. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2009, 38, 1642–1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Giusiano, G.; Aguirre, C.; Vratnica, C.; Rojas, F.; Corallo, T.; Cattana, M.E.; Fernandez, M.; Mussin, J.; de Los Angeles Sosa, M. Emergence of acute/subacute infant-juvenile paracoccidioidomycosis in Northeast Argentina: Effect of climatic and anthropogenic changes? Med. Mycol. 2019, 57, 30–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Teixeira, M.M.; Theodoro, R.C.; Oliveira, F.F.; Machado, G.C.; Hahn, R.C.; Bagagli, E.; San-Blas, G.; Soares Felipe, M.S. Paracoccidioides lutzii sp. nov.: Biological and clinical implications. Med. Mycol. 2014, 52, 19–28. [Google Scholar]
  103. Turissini, D.A.; Gomez, O.M.; Teixeira, M.M.; McEwen, J.G.; Matute, D.R. Species boundaries in the human pathogen Paracoccidioides. Fungal Genet. Biol. FG B 2017, 106, 9–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Index Fungorum Paracoccidioides venezuelensis. Available online: http://www.indexfungorum.org/names/NamesRecord.asp?RecordID=816862 (accessed on 18 November 2020).
  105. Lopes-Bezerra, L.M.; Mora-Montes, H.M.; Zhang, Y.; Nino-Vega, G.; Rodrigues, A.M.; de Camargo, Z.P.; de Hoog, S. Sporotrichosis between 1898 and 2017: The evolution of knowledge on a changeable disease and on emerging etiological agents. Med. Mycol. 2018, 56, 126–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Benedict, K.; Jackson, B. Sporotrichosis cases in commercial insurance data, United States, 2012–2018. Emerg. Infect. Dis. J. 2020, 26, 2783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Gold, J.A.; Derado, G.; Mody, R.K.; Benedict, K. Sporotrichosis-Associated hospitalizations, United States, 2000–2013. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2016, 22, 1817–1820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  108. Hajjeh, R.; McDonnell, S.; Reef, S.; Licitra, C.; Hankins, M.; Toth, B.; Padhye, A.; Kaufman, L.; Pasarell, L.; Cooper, C.; et al. Outbreak of sporotrichosis among tree nursery workers. J. Infect. Dis. 1997, 176, 499–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  109. Coles, F.B.; Schuchat, A.; Hibbs, J.R.; Kondracki, S.F.; Salkin, I.F.; Dixon, D.M.; Chang, H.G.; Duncan, R.A.; Hurd, N.J.; Morse, D.L. A multistate outbreak of sporotrichosis associated with sphagnum moss. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1992, 136, 475–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Dooley, D.P.; Bostic, P.S.; Beckius, M.L. Spook house sporotrichosis. A point-source outbreak of sporotrichosis associated with hay bale props in a Halloween haunted-house. Arch. Intern. Med. 1997, 157, 1885–1887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. CDC. Multistate outbreak of sporotrichosis in seedling handlers, 1988. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 1988, 37, 652–653. [Google Scholar]
  112. Dahl, B.A.; Silberfarb, P.M.; Sarosi, G.A.; Weeks, R.J.; Tosh, F.E. Sporotrichosis in children. Report of an epidemic. JAMA 1971, 215, 1980–1982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Rossow, J.A.; Queiroz-Telles, F.; Caceres, D.H.; Beer, K.D.; Jackson, B.R.; Pereira, J.G.; Ferreira Gremião, I.D.; Pereira, S.A. one health approach to combatting Sporothrix brasiliensis: Narrative review of an emerging zoonotic fungal pathogen in South America. J. Fungi 2020, 6, 247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Silva, M.B.; Costa, M.M.; Torres, C.C.; Galhardo, M.C.; Valle, A.C.; Magalhães, A.; Sabroza, P.C.; Magalhães de Oliveira, R. Urban sporotrichosis: A neglected epidemic in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Cad. Saude Publica 2012, 28, 1867–1880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  115. Gremião, I.D.; Miranda, L.H.; Reis, E.G.; Rodrigues, A.M.; Pereira, S.A. Zoonotic epidemic of sporotrichosis: Cat to human Transmission. PLoS Pathog. 2017, 13, e1006077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Rodrigues, A.M.; de Hoog, G.S.; de Camargo, Z.P. Sporothrix species causing outbreaks in animals and humans driven by animal-animal transmission. PLoS Pathog. 2016, 12, e1005638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Córdoba, S.; Isla, G.; Szusz, W.; Vivot, W.; Hevia, A.; Davel, G.; Canteros, C.E. Molecular identification and susceptibility profile of Sporothrix schenckii sensu lato isolated in Argentina. Mycoses 2018, 61, 441–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Etchecopaz, A.; Scarpa, M.; Mas, J.; Cuestas, M.L. Sporothrix brasiliensis: A growing hazard in the Northern area of Buenos Aires Province? Rev. Argent. Microbiol. 2020, 52, 350–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. García Duarte, J.M.; Wattiez Acosta, V.R.; Fornerón Viera, P.M.L.; Aldama Caballero, A.; Gorostiaga Matiauda, G.A.; Rivelli de Oddone, V.B. Esporotricosis trasmitida por gato doméstico. Reporte de un caso familiar. Rev. Nac. (Itauguá) 2017, 9, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. PAHO. Sporothrix brasiliensis, an emerging fungal pathogen, notable for its zoonotic transmission and epidemic potential for human and animal health in the Americas. PLoS Pathogen. 2019, 13, e1006077. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. Summary of taxonomy, ecology, geographic range, clinical features, and epidemiology of coccidioidomycosis, histoplasmosis, blastomycosis, paracoccidioidomycosis, and sporotrichosis.
Table 1. Summary of taxonomy, ecology, geographic range, clinical features, and epidemiology of coccidioidomycosis, histoplasmosis, blastomycosis, paracoccidioidomycosis, and sporotrichosis.
CoccidioidomycosisHistoplasmosisBlastomycosisParacoccidioidomycosisSporotrichosis
TaxonomyC. immitis and C. posadasiiH. capsulatum
New species proposed, but classification currently not validated
In North America:
B. dermatitidis, B. gilchristii and B. helicus
P. brasiliensis and P. lutzii
New species proposed, but classification currently not validated
Sporothrix species complex (S. schenckii, S. brasiliensis, S. globosa, S. mexicana, S. luriei, and
S. pallida)
EcologyHot arid regions, with prolonged dry season and short monsoon rainy seasonSoil contaminated with Histoplasma, particularly soil contained bird or bat guanoMoist soil and decomposing organic matter such as wood and leaves Unknown. Environmental characteristics include altitude from 1000 to 1499 m ASL, high annual rainfall, and presence of humid forests Saprophytic of soil and plants. Found on a variety of
mammals (especially cats)
Known
geographic range
Western United States, northern regions of Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Venezuela, Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina Most countries in the Americas and the major islands in the Caribbean, except the western half of Mexico, the western coast of Peru, and most of ChileIn the Americas, primarily in North America (United States and Canada), especially areas surrounding the Ohio and Mississippi River valleys and the Great Lakes regionRestricted to Latin American countries, from Mexico to Argentina. Most cases from Brazil. Extremely rare in the Caribbean Worldwide distribution, especially in tropical
and subtropical regions.
S. brasiliensis has been reported mostly in eastern Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay
Clinical featuresPulmonary disease: acute respiratory infection, pulmonary nodules and cavities, and chronic fibrocavitary pneumonia
Extrapulmonary disease: bones, joints, central nervous system
Acute and subacute pulmonary disease
Disseminated disease (including acute, subacute, and chronic stages)
Chronic pulmonary disease
Disease sequelae *
Pulmonary disease: acute and chronic infection, and acute respiratory distress syndrome
Extrapulmonary disease: skin, genitourinary, osseous, and central nervous system
Subclinical infection
Residual form
Acute/subacute disease
Chronic progressive disease
>90% of cases occur in males
Lymphocutaneous disease
Multifocal extracutaneous disease
Pulmonary disease (rare)
EpidemiologyApproximately 15,000 cases reported per year in the United States, mainly from Arizona and CaliforniaApproximately 1000 cases reported from 12 U.S. states annually, but the true burden is unknown. In PLHIV from LATAM was estimated 6710–15,657 cases (2020) In U.S. states where disease is reportable, incidence rates 1 to 2 cases per 100,000 population.
Hyperendemic regions rates ranging from 10 to 40 cases per 100,000 persons
Most cases reported in Brazil (~80%). In endemic countries, estimated prevalence ranges from 0.3–3 cases per 100,000 population Estimated 2 cases per million population in the United States
(PLHIV) people living with HIV, (CNS) central nervous system, (Ag) antigen, (CDC) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (LATAM) Latin America countries, (ASL) above sea level, (*) fibrosis and antigen hypersensitivity.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lockhart, S.R.; Toda, M.; Benedict, K.; Caceres, D.H.; Litvintseva, A.P. Endemic and Other Dimorphic Mycoses in The Americas. J. Fungi 2021, 7, 151. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jof7020151

AMA Style

Lockhart SR, Toda M, Benedict K, Caceres DH, Litvintseva AP. Endemic and Other Dimorphic Mycoses in The Americas. Journal of Fungi. 2021; 7(2):151. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jof7020151

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lockhart, Shawn R., Mitsuru Toda, Kaitlin Benedict, Diego H. Caceres, and Anastasia P. Litvintseva. 2021. "Endemic and Other Dimorphic Mycoses in The Americas" Journal of Fungi 7, no. 2: 151. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jof7020151

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop