Opportunistic fungal pathogens may cause superficial or serious invasive infections, especially in immunocompromised and debilitated patients. Invasive mycoses represent an exponentially growing threat for human health due to a combination of slow diagnosis and the existence of relatively few classes of available and effective antifungal drugs. Therefore systemic fungal infections result in high attributable mortality. There is an urgent need to pursue and deploy novel and effective alternative antifungal countermeasures. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) was established as a successful modality for malignancies and age-related macular degeneration but photodynamic inactivation has only recently been intensively investigated as an alternative antimicrobial discovery and development platform. The concept of photodynamic inactivation requires microbial exposure to either exogenous or endogenous photosensitizer molecules, followed by visible light energy, typically wavelengths in the red/near infrared region that cause the excitation of the photosensitizers resulting in the production of singlet oxygen and other reactive oxygen species that react with intracellular components, and consequently produce cell inactivation and death. Antifungal PDT is an area of increasing interest, as research is advancing (i) to identify the photochemical and photophysical mechanisms involved in photoinactivation; (ii) to develop potent and clinically compatible photosensitizers; (iii) to understand how photoinactivation is affected by key microbial phenotypic elements multidrug resistance and efflux, virulence and pathogenesis determinants, and formation of biofilms; (iv) to explore novel photosensitizer delivery platforms; and (v) to identify photoinactivation applications beyond the clinical setting such as environmental disinfectants.

Sodium azide (NaN3) is widely employed to quench singlet oxygen during photodynamic therapy (PDT), especially when PDT is used to kill bacteria in suspension. We observed that addition of NaN3 (100 μM or 10 mM) to gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus and gram-negative Escherichia coli incubated with methylene blue (MB) and illuminated with red light gave significantly increased bacterial killing (1–3 logs), rather than the expected protection from killing. A different antibacterial photosensitizer, the conjugate between polyethylenimine and chlorin(e6) (PEI-ce6), showed reduced PDT killing (1–2 logs) after addition of 10 mM NaN3. Azide (0.5 mM) potentiated bacterial killing by Fenton reagent (hydrogen peroxide and ferrous sulfate) by up to 3 logs, but protected against killing mediated by sodium hypochlorite and hydrogen peroxide (considered to be a chemical source of singlet oxygen). The intermediacy of N3• was confirmed by spin-trapping and electron spin resonance studies in both MB-photosensitized reactions and Fenton reagent with addition of NaN3. We found that N3• was formed and bacteria were killed even in the absence of oxygen, suggesting the direct one-electron oxidation of azide anion by photoexcited MB. This observation suggests a possible mechanism to carry out oxygen-independent PDT.

No abstract

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) was discovered over one hundred years ago when it was observed that certain dyes could kill microorganisms when exposed to light in the presence of oxygen. Since those early days, PDT has mainly been developed as a cancer therapy and as a way to destroy proliferating blood vessels. However, recently it has become apparent that PDT may also be used as an effective antimicrobial modality and a potential treatment for localized infections. This review discusses the similarities and differences between the application of PDT for the treatment of microbial infections and for cancer lesions. Type I and type II photodynamic processes are described, and the structure-function relationships of optimal anticancer and antimicrobial photosensitizers are outlined. The different targeting strategies, intracellular photosensitizer localization, and pharmacokinetic properties of photosensitizers required for these two different PDT applications are compared and contrasted. Finally, the ability of PDT to stimulate an adaptive or innate immune response against pathogens and tumors is also covered.