# Drug Repurposing in Medical Mycology: Identification of Compounds as Potential Antifungals to Overcome the Emergence of Multidrug-Resistant Fungi

Lucie Peyclit, Hanane Yousfi, Jean-Marc Rolain, Fadi Bittar

► To cite this version:

Lucie Peyclit, Hanane Yousfi, Jean-Marc Rolain, Fadi Bittar. Drug Repurposing in Medical Mycology: Identification of Compounds as Potential Antifungals to Overcome the Emergence of Multidrug-Resistant Fungi. Pharmaceuticals, 2021, 14 (5), pp.488. 10.3390/ph14050488. [hal-03308207](https://hal HAL Id: hal-03308207)

Submitted on 17 Sep 2021

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Review

# Drug Repurposing in Medical Mycology: Identification of Compounds as Potential Antifungals to Overcome the Emergence of Multidrug-Resistant Fungi

Lucie Peyclit <sup>1,2,†</sup>, Hanane Yousfi <sup>1,2,†</sup>, Jean-Marc Rolain <sup>1,2</sup> and Fadi Bittar <sup>1,2,*</sup>

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

check for
updates

**Citation:** Peyclit, L.; Yousfi, H.; Rolain, J.-M.; Bittar, F. Drug Repurposing in Medical Mycology: Identification of Compounds as Potential Antifungals to Overcome the Emergence of Multidrug-Resistant Fungi. *Pharmaceuticals* **2021**, *14*, 488. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph14050488

Academic Editors: Jong Heon Kim, Luisa W. Cheng and Kirkwood Land

Received: 12 March 2021

Accepted: 18 May 2021

Published: 20 May 2021

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

**Copyright:** © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

**Abstract:** Immunodepression, whether due to HIV infection or organ transplantation, has increased human vulnerability to fungal infections. These conditions have created an optimal environment for the emergence of opportunistic infections, which is concomitant to the increase in antifungal resistance. The use of conventional antifungal drugs as azoles and polyenes can lead to clinical failure, particularly in immunocompromised individuals. Difficulties related to treating fungal infections combined with the time required to develop new drugs, require urgent consideration of other therapeutic alternatives. Drug repurposing is one of the most promising and rapid solutions that the scientific and medical community can turn to, with low costs and safety advantages. To treat life-threatening resistant fungal infections, drug repurposing has led to the consideration of well-known and potential molecules as a last-line therapy. The aim of this review is to provide a summary of current antifungal compounds and their main resistance mechanisms, following by an overview of the antifungal activity of non-traditional antimicrobial drugs. We provide their eventual mechanisms of action and the synergistic combinations that improve the activity of current antifungal treatments. Finally, we discuss drug repurposing for the main emerging multidrug resistant (MDR) fungus, including the *Candida auris*, *Aspergillus* or *Cryptococcus* species.

**Keywords:** drug repurposing; antifungals; repositioning; yeasts; emerging fungi; multidrug resistance; therapeutic alternatives; new targets; *Candida auris*; *Aspergillus* spp.

## 1. Introduction

Most public health organizations, including the World Health Organization, do not have a fungal infection surveillance program, despite the fact that invasive fungal infections present a high mortality rate worldwide, often exceeding 50% [1,2]. Fungal infections have long been poorly documented and recognized, perhaps due to the need to treat other severe and serious bacterial and viral infections. However, mycoses should no longer be ignored.

The signs and symptoms of fungal infection appear during antibiotic therapy, particularly due to opportunistic fungal agents. In particular, invasive fungal infections affect patients with compromised immune systems, such as those with hematologic malignancies, HIV infection, chemotherapy treatments, etc. [3,4]. In addition, other factors such as the ageing of the population, which is susceptible to these opportunistic infections and improvements in diagnostic methods have led to their increasing prevalence in hospitals. A significant number of fungal agents, including yeast and yeast-like species such as *Candida* spp., *Cryptococcus* spp. and molds such as the *Aspergillus* species, complicate clinical management, with a variety of symptoms, prevalence and clinical outcomes [5]. Moreover, fungal infections can also occur in healthy people, so it is difficult to control their spread [6]. Therefore, greater consideration should be given to monitoring fungal infections [7–9].

<footnote n="1">¹ Aix Marseille Univ, IRD, APHM, MEPHI, 13005 Marseille, France; lucie.peyclit@ap-hm.fr (L.P.); hanane.yousfi@univ-evry.fr (H.Y.); jean-marc.rolain@univ-amu.fr (J.-M.R.)</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² IHU Méditerranée Infection, 13005 Marseille, France</footnote>

<footnote>* Correspondence: fadi.bittar@univ-amu.fr</footnote>

<footnote>† The authors contributed equally.</footnote>
To deal with these fungal infections, there are only four main therapeutic classes currently used in clinical practice, namely polyenes, azoles, echinocandins and flucytosine. Although these drugs remain active, they display several limitations that complicate their routine use including off-target toxicity, drugs interaction, clinical failure and long-term treatment [10]. Furthermore, the emerging resistance to antifungals and the poor clinical response of many isolates to antifungal therapy make this an even greater public-health concern. For example, previous exposure to an antifungal agent such as fluconazole has been shown to increase the risk of fluconazole-resistant *Candida* infections in immunocompromised patients [11]. Antifungal resistance remains a critical global problem, although it may vary depending on the species, geography and available therapeutic alternatives [5]. Some species are known to be more resistant than others, leading to treatment failure; these include *Candida* pathogens (*Candida glabrata*, *Candida krusei*, *Candida lusitaniae* and the very newly emerging yeast: *Candida auris*), some cryptococcal species and opportunistic *Aspergillus* or *Fusarium* species associated with immunocompromised hosts [5]. The aforementioned species commonly exhibit high intrinsic antifungal resistance profiles, sometimes to different classes of antifungals as is the case with almost all *Fusarium* spp. to triazoles, 5-fluorocytosine and echinocandins [5].

Despite great efforts made internationally to deal with antibiotic resistance by reducing the inappropriate consumption of antimicrobials, this does not yet extend to the use of antifungal agents. In reality, antifungal resistance may arise from fungicide use in agriculture, as described in a recent study in 2017, where plant bulbs were found to be positive for triazole-resistant *Aspergillus fumigatus*, rather than from clinical use [12]. Furthermore, antifungal therapies are mostly given to immunocompromised patients or those in intensive care units (ICUs), when treatment is unavoidable, rather than in preventive use in community medicine. Demers et al. described the impact of the heterogeneity of a single gene (MRR1), found in different *C. lusitaniae* subpopulations in an azole-naïve cystic fibrosis patient, on the level of fluconazole resistance, highlighting other indirect factors involved, such as the host immune system and coinfecting bacteria [13]. Therefore, reducing the consumption of antifungals may not be the only solution to improving the difficult management of invasive fungal diseases.

The development of new antifungal drugs represents a major challenge for the pharmaceutical industry, since fungi are eukaryotic organisms and have a close evolutionary relationship with their human hosts [14]. In addition, the pharmaceutical industry is no longer interested in developing and marketing new antimicrobials, including antifungals [1,15]. Indeed, the drug development process remains very expensive, time-consuming and risky due to many factors [16]. Given the difficulties of treating invasive fungal infections, consideration should be made to use efficient alternative strategies to implement immediate and appropriate measures. New targets involving enzymes and other metabolic pathways, or new formulations/generations are under development to broaden the spectrum of antifungal activities and to potentially overcome current resistances [17–20]. New antifungals can also be found in natural products or plant extracts, inspired by traditional medicine and aromatherapy [21,22]. Indeed, various essential oils showed in vitro efficiency against clinical yeast or fungi [23–25]. Preclinical studies to determine human toxicities, pharmacodynamics and clinical trials must continue [21,25]. At the same time, the strategy of drug repurposing (also called drug repositioning) consists of identifying drugs known to be effective for another indication than that for which they are marketed [15]. This strategy has gained in popularity in recent years and has already proven to be effective, particularly in oncology, cardiology and Alzheimer’s disease. These reinvestigated drugs have already completed preclinical trials, main human toxicities are well known, and the research and development process can be, considerably, reduced allowing for lower investment costs and faster potential clinical use [15,26]. However, the setting up of this strategy is not a straightforward matter as it does not exclude carrying out further clinical trials before the simple repositioning of a given drug, but it must also initially deal with the intellectual property rights, regulatory/authority process, license grant, pricing, patient’s
acceptance, marketing strategy and commercialization in order to avoid any failure at the
development stage [27].

The aim of this review is to report on the non-antifungal drugs that may be active against the most common emerging multidrug-resistant (MDR) fungi in human pathology. We first summarize the antifungal compounds currently used for clinical therapies and their main mechanisms of resistance and then report on alternative drugs used to treat fungal infections that have been reported in the literature so far. Finally, we address different drugs that have a potential for repurposing to treat the main difficult to treat fungi.

## 2. Current Antifungal Agents and Their Mechanisms of Resistance

Since their first and progressive discovery in the mid-20th century, systemic antifungals have improved the management of many invasive fungal infections. The spectrum of antifungals and their mechanisms of action are diverse, since they act on different structures in the fungal cell; we describe them below (Figure 1).

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** Therapeutic targets in the fungal cell of the compounds listed in the review: known antifungals and molecules that have a potential for repurposing as antifungals.</figcaption></figure>

The first antifungal agents, polyenes, were developed in 1950s for clinical use and have a large spectrum of activity against yeast and filamentous fungi. Polyenes are macrocyclic
organic molecules from a soil actinomycete, *Streptomyces nodosus* [28]. The two most clinically relevant members of this class are topical nystatin and intravenous amphotericin B. Both bind to a sterol moiety, ergosterol, on the fungal cell membrane, disrupting cell permeability and leading to cellular lysis. Nystatin is not effective against dermatophytes but is effective against the *Candida* species [29]. Liposomal amphotericin B has been developed to allow the administration of higher doses with less nephrotoxicity (fewer side effects) to mammalian cells.

Resistance to polyenes is mainly related to changes in the lipid structure of the mem-
brane and subsequently a modification in its fluidity and absorbency. The principal altered
effects concern enzymes that are involved in the synthesis of ergosterol. Deficiencies in the
ERG2 and ERG3 genes, which code for the isomerase of C-8 sterol and delta-5,6-desaturase,
induce modifications in membrane sterols. The quantity of ergosterol is modified, conse-
quently affecting polyene activity. Boosted activity of catalase, an antioxidant enzyme that
decreases oxidative injury, represents another polyene-resistance mechanism. However,
intrinsic amphotericin B resistance frequently described in some *Aspergillus* spp. strains
not only include the alteration of the ergosterol pathway but the signaling pathways, such
as those described in *A. terreus* [30] or increased enzymatic activity of the peroxidase and
superoxide dismutase in *A. flavus* [31] (Table 1).

Discovered in 1980s, azoles now represent the best conventional antifungal agents for medical treatment. Azole compounds have had a major impact on the treatment of invasive fungal infections over the last 35 years. The use of the first available azoles, imidazoles including ketoconazole, miconazole and clotrimazole, was primarily restricted to the treatment of superficial fungal infections. These compounds were substituted by the first-generation of triazoles, such as fluconazole and itraconazole, to broaden the range of application. Later, the search for new antifungals was intensified to overcome some efficiency limitations and to prevent emerging resistant pathogens. The second generation of triazoles (voriconazole, posaconazole, efaconazole and isavuconazole) were developed with an extended spectrum of activity [32,33]. The final target of these drugs is ergosterol from the cell membrane. They inhibit lanosterol-14α-demethylase in mitochondria, which interferes with the synthesis of the membrane ergosterol. Each azole has a different affinity in its inhibition of lanosterol, which may explains the differences in spectrum of activity among azole agents [34], but all have a strong inhibitor effect on the CYP450 enzyme system, which is responsible for many drug interactions [35]. The global HIV epidemic led to the widespread and significant use of fluconazole to treat oro-oesophageal candidiasis in HIV-infected patients and fluconazole-resistant *Candida* strains were later widely reported in these patients [34,36].

Four mechanisms of resistance have been demonstrated so far: (i) activation of the efflux pumps due to an overexpression of membrane-associated transporters encoded by the gene families of transporters (CDR and MDR) reduces azole plasmatic concentrations [30,34]; (ii) azole agents cannot, qualitatively, bind to their enzymatic target to target changes induced by a mutation in *ERG11* gene, which encodes for the lanosterol-14α-demethylase [33,34]; (iii) some strains induce the overexpression of ERG11 as a compensatory mechanism and increase the intracellular concentration of this protein. Thus, an increasing concentration of a given azole agent is needed to remain efficient. This resistance mechanism involves quantitative changes by upregulating the target enzyme [30,34]; (iv) some strains, with a mutation of the ERG3 gene, developed a pathway bypassing fungal membrane biosynthesis by replacing ergosterol with 14α-methyl-fecosterol and preventing the accumulation of a toxic product: 14α-methyl-3,6-diol. This alternative route of ergosterol biosynthesis maintains both the function of the fungal membrane and the resistance to azoles [33] (Table 1).

Mannan, chitin and α- and β-glucans are the main compounds of the fungal cell
wall. Drugs belonging to the echinocandins target one of these components and act as
antifungals, inhibiting β-(1,3)-glucan synthetase leading to a depletion of β-(1,3)-glucan,
an essential component for the structuring and function of the cell wall [33]. Echinocandins
(caspofungin, anidulafungin and micafungin) are semisynthetic cyclic lipopeptides derived from natural products. They present a reserve supplement to the arsenal of drugs available to treat invasive fungal diseases with a fungicidal action against the *Candida* species and a fungistatic activity against the *Aspergillus* species [37].

<table><caption>**Table 1.** Current main antifungal agents: mechanisms of action, clinical indications, side effects and mechanisms of antifungal resistance. FCZ: fluconazole, ITZ: itraconazole, VRZ: voriconazole.</caption><thead><tr><th>Antifungal Classes</th><th>Mechanisms of Action</th><th>Clinical Indications</th><th>Side Effects</th><th>Mechanisms of Resistance</th><th>Common Resistant Species</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Polyenes</strong><br>Amphotericin B<br>Nystatin</td><td>Ergosterol binding (membrane) permeabilization by ion channel formation Cell content leakage</td><td>Invasive fungal infection<br>Topical Candida infections</td><td>Renal toxicity<br>Hypokalemia<br>Phlebitis<br>Immunoallergic reaction</td><td>Deficiencies in ERG2 and ERG3 genes<br>Ergosterol synthesis alteration<br>Modifications in membrane sterols<br>Changes of enzymatic activity or signaling pathways</td><td>Scedosporium spp.,<br>Candida lusitaniae,<br>Aspergillus terreus</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Azoles</strong><br>Fluconazole<br>Itraconazole<br>Voriconazole<br>Posaconazole<br>Efinaconazole<br>Isavuconazole</td><td>Inhibition of lanosterol Ergosterol synthesis inhibition Alteration of fungal membrane fluidity and agility</td><td>All invasive candidiasis<br>Cryptococcal meningitis<br>Aspergillus spp. infections</td><td>Digestive disturbances<br>Cephalalgias<br>Hepatotoxicity<br>Drug interactions (CYPP450)</td><td>Over expression of efflux pump's function<br>ERG11 gene mutations inducing blockage in azoles binding<br>Up-regulation of enzyme target<br>Bypass pathway development by ERG3 gene mutation</td><td>FCZ: Candida krusei,<br>Aspergillus spp.,<br>Scedosporium spp.,<br>Fusarium spp.,<br>Mucorales<br>ITZ: Fusarium spp.<br>VRZ: Mucorales</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Echinocandins</strong><br>Micafungin<br>Caspofungin<br>Anidulafungin</td><td>Inhibition of β-1,3-glucan synthase (β-GS) Formation of a defective cell wall</td><td>Invasive candidiasis<br>Invasive aspergillosis (2nd intention)</td><td>Good overall tolerance</td><td>Mutations on FKS1 gene (encoding for a subunit of β-GS)<br>Decrease of affinity between drug and target</td><td>Cryptococcus spp.,<br>Fusarium spp.,<br>Scedosporium spp.,<br>Mucorales</td></tr><tr><td>5-fluorocytosine</td><td>Nucleoside analogue Disruption of protein synthesis Inhibition of DNA synthesis</td><td>Cryptococcosis<br>Invasive candidiasis if treatment failure Always in association</td><td>Gastrointestinal troubles<br>Hepatotoxicity<br>Hematotoxicity</td><td>Mutations on FUR1 gene (encoding uracil phosphoribosyl transferase)<br>Mutations on FCY1 gene (encoding cytosine deaminase enzyme)</td><td>Ineffective against many filamentous fungi</td></tr></tbody></table>

*Candida* resistance to echinocandins has been related to several mutations in a hot-spot region of the *FKS1* gene, which encodes for a subunit of echinocandin target, resulting in a lower affinity between the antifungal and its target [5,30] (Table 1).

A pyrimidine analogue, 5-fluorocytosine (5-FC), was developed in 1957 as an antimetabolite. Without any potential use as an anticancer treatment, it was used to treat fungal infections. Once 5-fluorocytosine enters the fungal cell, enzymes convert it in compounds to be incorporated in the synthesized RNA. This disrupts the protein synthesis of the affected fungi. It is also converted as a potent inhibitor of thymidylate synthase, which interferes in DNA synthesis and nuclear division [33]. It is always combined with other drugs, in association with azoles or amphotericin B, due to the high prevalence of intrinsic resistance in many fungal species and to the rapid development of resistance in yeast [33,34]. The primary resistance was about 10% in the *Candida albicans* strains [30]. Resistance to 5-FC may be due to mutations in *FUR1* or in the genes *FCY1* and *FCY2* leading to defects in flucytosine metabolism [30] (Table 1).

Finally, it is notable that, besides the limited number of available antimycotic agents and the burden of antifungal resistance (described above), toxicities and drug-drug interactions of antifungals, the treatment failure due to clinical resistance is frequently reported in invasive mycoses [34]. In fact, in vitro antifungal susceptibility testing does not guarantee the success of in vivo treatment. Many factors affecting the infected patient, the respon-
sible fungal strain and the prescribed antifungal agent, which have been well reviewed elsewhere [34], may explain this clinical resistance.

### 3. Non-Antifungal Drugs Identified as Having a Potential Antifungal Activity against Invasive Fungal Strains

Given the rapid evolution of resistance to antifungal drugs and the high prevalence of mycoses in clinical settings due to the increasing number of human immunodeficiency cases and/or as the result of improved fungal diagnosis, there is an urgent need to improve the efficacy of current treatments and to develop new therapeutic strategies. It is worth considering innovative approaches [5] or, simply, associations of existing drugs, which could be a promising approach to extending the use of current antifungal agents. Indeed, drug combination resulting in a synergistic activity has the potential to impede the evolution of drug resistance through employing several mechanisms or targets [15]. However, this should not be considered as the only “miracle” solution because interactions can be indifferent and combinations can be unsuccessful [38].

Drug repositioning or repurposing allows for new indications for previously approved drugs that are already marketed for other medical reasons. This approach offers many benefits over de novo drug development. Previously established pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles and toxicity data allow for faster and cheaper development of repositioned molecules. Consequently, clinical use may be considered to overcome the rapid emergence of resistant fungi and outbreaks [15,39]. In this paper, we reported on molecules that have been found to be active in vitro or even in vivo against fungal agents, according to their initial therapeutic class (Figure 1 and Table 2).

#### 3.1. Antimicrobials Apart from Antifungals

Polymyxins including colistin and polymyxin B are peptide antibiotics and target the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria [40]. Tested against MDR yeasts and molds, polymyxins showed an antifungal activity with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) ranging from 16 to 128 µg/mL [41]. In particular, a fungicidal effect was described with colistin against C. albicans, Cryptococcus neoformans and Rhodotorula mucilaginosa. The mechanism of action was similar to the bacterial mechanism, by inducing membrane damage to MDR-C. albicans, as observed under fluorescent microscopy [41]. Using a checkerboard microdilution assay, synergistic activity was revealed with colistin-amphotericin B and colistin-itraconazole, against MDR C. albicans and Lichtheimia corymbifera strains [41]. The colistin-azoles combination has also been reported more recently in strains showing low susceptibilities to fluconazole. Bibi M. et al. confirm that colistin binds to the lipids of fungal membranes and works in relation to an ergosterol depletion level due to the previous action of azoles [42].

<table><caption>**Table 2.** Drugs with reported in vitro antifungal activities. NR: not reported.</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Drug</th><th>First Indication</th><th>Antifungal Activity</th><th>Activity Range</th><th>Antifungal Mechanism of Action</th><th>References</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="10">Antimicrobials</td><td>Polymyxins<br>Colistin<br>Polymyxin B</td><td>Gram-negative<br>bacterial infections</td><td>C. albicans<br>C. neoformans<br>R. mucilaginosa<br>S. apiospermum<br>L. prolificans<br>F. oxysporum<br>F. solani<br>R. oryzae</td><td>16–128 µg/mL</td><td>Membrane damages on<br><i>Candida albicans</i></td><td>[41]</td></tr><tr><td>Ribavirin</td><td>Hepatitis C</td><td>C. albicans<br>C. tropicalis<br>C. parapsilosis</td><td>0.37–3.02 µg/mL</td><td>Disruption of vacuoles<br>function of C. albicans<br>strains</td><td>[41,43]</td></tr><tr><td>Oxyclozanide</td><td>Animal<br>parasitosis</td><td>C. albicans</td><td>16–32 µg/mL</td><td>Uncoupling the<br>mitochondrial electron<br>transport from<br>phosphorylation and<br>changing the<br>mitochondrial membrane<br>potential</td><td>[44]</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>Table 2. *Cont.*</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Drug</th><th>First Indication</th><th>Antifungal Activity</th><th>Activity Range</th><th>Antifungal Mechanism of Action</th><th>References</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="10">Anti-inflammatory</td><td rowspan="3">Chloroquine</td><td rowspan="3">Malaria</td><td>C. neoformans</td><td>3.19 µg/mL (10 µM)</td><td>Iron deprivation</td><td>[45]</td></tr><tr><td>C. albicans</td><td>31.2–250 µg/mL</td><td>Inhibition of ergosterol biosynthesis & [46]</td><td>[47]</td></tr><tr><td>S. cerevisiae</td><td>NR</td><td>Growth inhibition via blocking thiamine transportation</td><td>[47]</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Mebendazole</td><td rowspan="2">Helminthiasis</td><td>C. neoformans</td><td>92.5 ng/mL</td><td>Morphological alterations by reducing capsular dimension</td><td>[48]</td></tr><tr><td>C. gatti</td><td>(0.3125 µM)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Auranofin</td><td>Rheumatoid arthritis</td><td>C. albicans<br>A. fumigatus<br>S. apiospermum<br>L. proliferans<br>C. neoformans</td><td>0.25–16 µg/mL</td><td>Action on reactive-oxygen-mediated cell death</td><td>[49,50]</td></tr><tr><td>Aspirin<br>Ibuprofen</td><td>Inflammation</td><td>Cryptococcus spp.<br>Candida spp.</td><td>1–10 mg/mL</td><td>Stress induction via ROS-mediated damage</td><td>[51,52]</td></tr><tr><td>Theophylline</td><td>Asthma, COPD</td><td>Candida spp.</td><td>1.4–1.8 mg/mL</td><td>Membrane damages by ionic and ergosterol modifications</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">Antipsychotics</td><td>Haloperidol</td><td rowspan="2">Psychosis</td><td>C. albicans</td><td rowspan="2">&lt;4 µg/mL</td><td rowspan="2">Possible action on GPCRs, mediators of signals across the cell membrane</td><td rowspan="2">[54,55]</td></tr><tr><td>Trifluperidol</td><td>C. neoformans</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Sertraline</td><td rowspan="3">Depression</td><td>C. neoformans<br>Lomentospora proliferans<br>Scedosporium spp., Fusarium spp.<br>Paecilomyces spp., Alternaria spp. and Curvularia spp.</td><td>2–6 µg/mL</td><td rowspan="3">Inhibition of protein synthesis</td><td rowspan="3">[56,57]</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>8–32 µg/mL</td></tr><tr><td>Candida spp.<br>C. neoformans<br>Filamentous fungi:<br>Aspergillus spp., Scedosporium spp., Pseudallescheria spp. and Zygomycetes</td><td>1–16 µg/mL</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Anticancers</td><td>Tamoxifen</td><td rowspan="2">Breast cancer</td><td>Candida spp.</td><td rowspan="2">8–64 µg/mL</td><td rowspan="2">Prevention of proteins calmodulin from binding to calcineurin, cell lysis and alteration of fungal development<br>Disturb the cell wall integrity via interaction with Ccr1</td><td rowspan="2">[60–62]</td></tr><tr><td>Toremifene</td><td>C. neoformans</td></tr><tr><td>Others</td><td>Disulfiram</td><td>Alcoholism</td><td>Candida spp.<br>C. neoformans<br>Aspergillus spp.</td><td>1–16 µg/mL</td><td>Chelating metals<br>Inhibition of multidrug transporter implicated in drug resistance</td><td>[63,64]</td></tr></tbody></table>

Other non-antifungal agents with bacterial activity have demonstrated a synergy with antifungals, as described by Rossato et al. [65]. For example, erythromycin with amphotericin B showed no toxic in vivo effect and could be a promising novel combination in invasive antifungal therapy [66].

Ribavirin, a purine nucleoside analogue, displays a broad-spectrum activity against many RNA and DNA viruses. Ribavirin is used to treat hepatitis C virus in combination with interferon-α [67]. Tournu et al. identified ribavirin as a potential *C. albicans* disrupting agent of vacuole, which is essential to yeast pathogenicity [43]. Based on this, we demonstrated the fungistatic activity of ribavirin against MDR *C. albicans* and fungicidal activity against *C. parapsilosis*. MICs largely ranged from 1.56 to 12.5 µmol/L (0.37–3.02 µg/mL) against *C. albicans*, *C. parapsilosis* and *C. tropicalis*. Synergistic activity was also reported when the antiviral agent was combined with either amphotericin B, fluconazole or itra-
conazole, against MDR *C. albicans* and was thus proposed to be further investigated for clinical use [68].

In terms of antiparasitic (anthelmintic) drugs, the activity of oxyclozanide, a halogenated salicylanilide, was demonstrated against *C. albicans* isolates, including ones that were resistant to azole and echinocandin. This anthelmintic agent seems to alter/disturb the mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation function and thus its ability to use the non-fermentable carbon sources by disrupting the mitochondrial membrane potential [44]. Oxyclozanide is widely used as an antiparasitic veterinary drug against the liver fluke *Fasciola hepatica* [69], and has been studied for antibacterial properties against colistin-resistant Gram-negative bacilli infections [70]. Pic et al. showed that oxyclozanide inhibited, at 58% and 99%, the growth of *C. albicans* at a concentration of 10 and 100 µM, respectively. These concentrations are comparable to the therapeutic dose used for an ovine weighing 45 kg [71], however its repurposing strategy in human therapies requires further and careful data on pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics and/or in vivo therapeutic assays, as this drug has not yet been used in humans.

The first and main antimalarial drug, chloroquine, is able to be used in different indications as it has many effects on inflammatory responses, metabolic process, the immune system and infections [72,73]. Weber et al. described that chloroquine treatment of macrophages infected with cryptococcal cells led to the formation of iron complexes inducing the death of *C. neoformans* [45]. Chloroquine has also been shown to inhibit thiamine transporters in the yeast *Saccharomyces cerevisiae*, linked to glucose metabolism [47]. It can also damage fungal morphogenesis due to an abnormal synthesis of ergosterol in drug-resistant *C. albicans* strains [74].

Benzimidazoles such as mebendazole, albendazole, flubendazole and triclabendazole are broad-spectrum anthelmintic drugs. Joffe et al. demonstrated the efficacy of benzimidazoles in inhibiting the growth of *C. neoformans*, especially mebendazole and flubendazole [48]. Mebendazole has been suggested to be repurposed as an anticryptococcal drug because it can efficiently penetrate the blood-brain barrier in animal models [48,75].

## 3.2. Anti-Inflammatory Drugs

Recently, Ogundeji et al. reported that aspirin and ibuprofen can control the growth of cryptococcal cells, with a high susceptibility of *C. neoformans* strains. Ibuprofen had a greater inhibitory effect than aspirin on all 10 *Cryptococcus* spp. tested strains at various drug concentrations [51]. The effects of ibuprofen seem to be dose-dependent; at high concentration (10 mg/mL), *Candida* cells are killed whereas at lower concentration (5 mg/mL), the drug was fungistatic [52]. In addition, synergistic outcomes were observed between ibuprofen and fluconazole or amphotericin B in *Cryptococcus* spp. and *Candida* spp., with fractional inhibitory concentration (FIC) < 0.5 [51,52,76].

Auranofin inhibits several inflammatory pathways and has been used since 1985 as an antirheumatic drug. It has already been found to be effective to treat bacterial infections [77] but Wiederhold et al. showed that auranofin also displayed an activity against various yeast and molds such as *A. fumigatus*, *Scedosporium apiospermum* and *Lomentospora prolificans* [49]. Although auranofin MICs were sometimes higher than those of the reference treatment (i.e., fluconazole), these concentrations could be easily achieved in patients' blood treated with the usual therapeutic dose [49]. Therefore, auranofin, along with its activity on biofilms [78], could be used as a promising antifungal treatment [54,66]. However, due to its immunosuppressive action, this drug should be carefully investigated prior to administration as an antifungal agent, given that fungi-infected patients are commonly immunocompromised.

Finally, theophylline is generally used for asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and has been proposed to treat candidiasis as it had effects on cell membrane integrity [53].
### 3.3. Antipsychotic Drugs

Oral antipsychotic drugs are often used in routine clinical practice, so their side effects and toxicity are now well known. Recently, haloperidol and trifluperidol were described for their antifungal activity against *C. albicans* (with MICs values < 4 µg/mL) or against *C. neoformans* [55,79]. The authors demonstrated that the two antipsychotics had a similar effect to fluconazole, acting on the yeast membrane [54]. The combination of a haloperidol-derivative with the antifungal posaconazole displayed a 16-fold reduction in MIC values for both the azole agent and the antipsychotic, compared with each drug alone (from >32 and >128 to 2 and 8 µg/mL respectively) with a fractional inhibitory concentration index (FICI) of 0.13 [79]. Strong synergies were also observed against *C. glabrata* and *Aspergillus terreus* [79].

Sertraline, the most frequently prescribed antidepressant, has been reported to be fungicidal against *C. neoformans*, with MICs ranging between 2 and 6 µg/mL [56,80,81] but also against emerging fungi [57,82]. Moreover, in vivo sertraline antifungal activity was tested, in murine models of cryptococcosis, showing a reduction in the fungal burden [56]. The combination of this compound and azoles or amphotericin B showed efficiency against various *Cryptococcus* spp. strains [83,84]. Of the 53 tested isolates, 31 were affected by the synergistic combination sertraline-fluconazole (FICI ≤ 0.5) [83]. However, sertraline has shown some antagonist effects with fluconazole against *Candida* strains [56].

Despite many in vitro, in vivo and human studies showing the efficiency of sertraline as antifungal, disparities appear in the clinical studies [80,85]. In 2019, a clinical trial of 486 participants testing sertraline as an adjunctive treatment to IV amphotericin B and oral fluconazole to treat HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis did not significatively improve survival, but did reveal a similar fungal clearance rate between groups [85]. In 2020, another randomized trial testing sertraline as pre-emptive therapy was stopped without a final conclusion due to the severe side effects of sertraline that were observed [86].

Chlorpromazine and trifluoperazine, dopamine antagonists, are used to treat schizophrenia. They are largely reported as having antibacterial and antifungal effects [58,59,87] and Vitale et al. confirmed the in vitro antifungal activity against difficult-to-treat filamentous fungi such as *Aspergillus* species (*A. fumigatus*, *A. ustus* and *A. terreus*), zygomycetes (*Absidia corymbifera*, *Rhizopus oryzae* and *R. microspores*) and *Scedosporium* species (*S. apiospermum* and *S. prolificans*) [58]. Phenothiazines including chlorpromazine appear to act on the fungal membrane but this needs further consideration [58]. The use of the combination must be advised to avoid resistance, to have greater efficacy and a less toxic effect: for example, chlorpromazine-amphotericin B against *C. neoformans* [84] or *Candida* species [59] demonstrated an interesting synergism profile.

### 3.4. Anticancer Drugs

Anticancer drugs may represent an important source of potential repurposing drugs. Indeed, as they often work on the basic metabolism pathways of eucaryotic and human cells such as the DNA replicating pathway, yeast cells may also be affected. Various anticancer drugs have been seen to be efficient in vitro against yeast growth [54,88]. Butts et al. demonstrated the fungicidal activity of tamoxifen and toremifene, two estrogenic receptor antagonists, against *C. neoformans* within macrophages, where the main pathogenesis of this organism happens [60]. Tamoxifen is described as an inhibitor of calmodulin. In this way, tamoxifen-treated yeasts showed cell lysis and an alteration of fungal development [61,89]. Recently, the interaction between tamoxifen and its target Ccr1 has also been described as causing the disruption of cell wall integrity [62].

However, administration of anticancer molecules to patients who are often immunocompromised should only be taken after careful consideration due to the numerous side effects that these compounds can cause, including immunosuppression [90]. A bypass solution via a synergistic association could circumvent this limitation. Interestingly, both compounds were synergistic in vitro with amphotericin B and fluconazole against cryptococcal cells [60]. In addition, in vivo candidiasis was cured, in a murine model, by the administration of 200 mg/kg of body weight per day of tamoxifen [61]. Since then, a
randomized phase II clinical trial of tamoxifen as an adjuvant to the gold standard therapy for cryptococcal meningitis is in progress [91].

Antifolates as inhibitors of purine synthesis have also been reported to be effective agents against yeast development by reducing the quantity of ergosterol [65].

### 3.5. *Other Approved Drugs*

Finally, we reported on a few other well-known and old drugs that could be repurposed as their indications, doses and side effects are known and thus can be easily managed.

Fluvastatin, rosuvastatin, atorvastatin and simvastatin are statins used to lower the synthesis of cholesterol by inhibiting HMG-CoA. Statins may be an important adjuvant for the treatment of fungal infections because their efficiency has been reported against fungi, even against azole-resistant yeasts [65,92]. Indeed, Macreadie et al. demonstrated a strong inhibition of the growth of *Candida* spp. (with the exception of *C. krusei* on YEPD media containing 100 µM of statins) and *A. fumigatus* [93]. On the fungal cell, statins might work on the pathway of mevalonate synthesis causing a decrease in ergosterol quantity of the cell membrane [93]. Statins showed in vitro synergy with various azoles and may display beneficial outcomes on candidiasis according to one cohort study in 2013 [65,81,94].

Disulfiram is an alcohol antagonist drug that has been used in clinical practice for many years. Khan et al. reported its antifungal potential in 2007 and provided an MIC range from 1 to 16 µg/mL for fluconazole-sensitive and resistant yeast strains, with an inhibiting effect on biofilm formation [95,96]. It also had a fungicidal activity on *Aspergillus* spp. [95]. Earlier, Shukla et al. demonstrated that disulfiram could reverse Cdr1p-mediated drug resistance so it could be used in combination to sensitize resistant strains [63,64]. Broadly, side effects of disulfiram are uncommon, contraindications include pregnancy and unstable cardiovascular disease and close hepatic monitoring is required [97]. Given all this information, in vitro, in vivo and clinical trials should be pursued to fully justify the repositioning of this molecule.

## **4. Some Emerging Multidrug-Resistant Fungi and Their Compounds with Repurpose Potential Identified through Phenotypic Screening**

Resistance to at least one class of antifungal agents is a concern of most existing fungal species. However, some major pathogens have a relatively high resistance rate and constitute a serious public health burden, especially *C. albicans*, *Cryptococcus* spp. and *Aspergillus* spp. In addition, other emerging and potentially life-threatening pathogens are increasingly being reported [98]. Some are still not well characterized and are opportunistic and MDR, such as *C. auris* [99], *Scedosporium* spp. and *Fusarium* spp. [100]. We present a non-exhaustive list of compounds below that could be effective as an alternative therapeutic strategy, depending on these MDR species (Figure 2).
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Examples of approved and candidate drugs with activity against emerging MDR fungi.</figcaption></figure>

4.1. *C. albicans* Biofilms

The pathogenicity of the *Candida* species resides in their ability to form biofilms, thereby protecting them from external elements such as antifungal agents or the host's immune system. The common implantation of a *Candida* biofilm on a medical device such as a catheter can lead to candidemia and severe systemic infections. In the absence or failure of treatment, the health and economic consequences are significant [101]. Some drugs alone or in combination with a currently used antifungal are effective in vitro to reduce or inhibit the formation of a biofilm [102,103].

As reported above, chloroquine reverts the azole resistance in biofilms [46], and aspirin [104], disulfiram [96] or auranofin [78] decrease in vitro the biofilm formation of many *Candida* species. Quinacrine is an antimalarial, which was used during WWII but remains available to treat giardiasis or cutaneous leishmaniasis. It has been effective at preventing and treating *C. albicans* biofilms with MIC ranges of 64–256 µg/mL [93]. In addition, both amphotericin B and caspofungin have synergy with quinacrine with an FICI equal to 0.37 and 0.31, respectively [105]. Benzodiazepines such as midazolam or diazepam have also been proposed to be repurposed against the biofilm formation of yeast, due to interaction with its virulence factors [106,107]. Anti-inflammatory compounds appear to be very efficient, such as celecoxib, etodolac, meloxicam, etc. [81]. In addition, flufenamic acid (a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, NSAID) showed an excellent action in the prevention and treatment of biofilms from echinocandin-resistant strains [108]. The hypnotic agent, etomidate, works against the biofilm of fluconazole-resistant *Candida*
spp. strains [109]. The antiseptic alexidine [103] and the finasteride used to treat the prostatic hyperplasia [110] were highly active in vitro at preventing *C. albicans* biofilms. Nile et al. highlighted the cholinergic receptor, which slowed down the biofilm-mediated virulence of *C. albicans* while having a boosting effect on the host immune response using pilocarpine [111] or tropicamide in a study by Machado et al. [112]. The antipsychotic drug aripiprazole was as effective as azoles by acting on the early formation of the pseudo hyphal [113]. As mentioned, many drugs from different therapeutic classes can be effective as an antibiofilm agent. In vivo studies first, followed by clinical trials remain important to confirm those in vitro options.

## 4.2. *C. auris*

*C. auris* is considered to be a serious global health threat due to its association with nosocomial invasive infections, its high mortality rate and its multidrug resistant profile [114]. High rates of antifungal resistance have been reported for fluconazole and amphotericin B, which is considered to be an intrinsic resistance, but some acquired resistances to echinocandins have been described in some countries [115,116]. The need for effective agents must be a priority in order to address future outbreaks, which, given the current situation, are highly likely [117]. To quickly identify candidate drugs, screening molecule libraries can offer various solutions [49,66,118]. Cheng et al. found six novel anti-*C. auris* compounds among more than 4300 approved drugs with 13 possible different drug associations [118]. The amebicide iodoquinol and leishmanicide miltefosine were reported in those screenings as being potential repositionable compounds due to their inhibition of *C. auris* growth [49]. Sulodictil [66], ebselen [66], antiemetic aprepitant [119] and lopinavir [120] were active against *C. auris*, either alone or in association with currently used antifungals. Finally, most of the drugs described above as being effective on yeast are also effective on *C. auris*, such as sertraline [121], oxyclonazide [44], colistin [112], etc. Indeed, these molecules are generally active via novel targets, which are still naïve in antifungal treatments and therefore in yeast adaptation.

## 4.3. *Aspergillus* Species

Invasive aspergillosis threatens the lives of millions of immunocompromised patients every year, with a mortality rate of 50/60% [98]. These species come from the environment and some patients are infected via contaminated foods [122,123]. Used for agricultural production, certain fungicides display a similar mechanism as azoles used in clinical routine. The evolution of resistance by selective pressure is attributed to their widespread use and there is an urgent need to find alternative strategies to current antifungals [124–126]. As a result, different drug screenings have been performed and have found that clozafimine, tacrolimus, cyclosporin [127], haloperidol [79], disulfiram [95], chlorpromazine [58] and auranofin [122] as reported above, could be repurposed as an anti-*Aspergillus* spp. treatment. Interesting synergies were also obtained between celecoxib and primaquine and paromomycin and β-escin with a FICI of <0.27 or <0.38, respectively, against *A. fumigatus* growth [128].

## 4.4. *Cryptococcus* Species

Occurring predominantly during the course of an immunocompromised patient's disease, cryptococcosis causes pneumonia or meningoencephalitis, due to an inhalation of *Cryptococcus* cells from the environment [129]. In addition to their worldwide spread, treatment of these infections remains challenging for clinicians who deal with only three classes of antifungal agents, as echinocandins are not effective against them [89]. Several molecules were found to be active against *Cryptococcus* cell growth, as mentioned above, such as auranofin, aspirin, ibuprofen [122], tamoxifen [129], mebendazole [48], sertraline [86,121] and disulfiram [95], and thioridazine, amiodarone [122], miltefosine [130] and calcium channel blockers such as nifedipine [131] have also been described. The antiparasitic drug, flubendazole, was very active, with MICs ranging from 0.039 to 0.156 µg/mL,
even against fluconazole-resistant strains [131]. Despite this, the perfect anticryptococcal treatment would exhibit a low toxicity for polymedicated, immunosuppressed patients would be well-distributed around the body to eradicate all cryptococcal niches including the cerebrospinal fluid [129].

### 4.5. Other Non-Aspergillus Molds

More rarely, other MDR fungal pathogens can cause aggressive and disseminated infections associated with poor prognosis such as Hyalohyphomycetes, including the genera *Fusarium*, *Scedosporium*, etc., or the Mucormycetes with *Mucor* and *Rhizomucor* group. Early and effective treatment is required to prevent the progression of the infection and to limit outbreaks [132,133]. However, this infection remains difficult to treat because the aforementioned fungi are resistant to most current antifungal drugs (Table 1) [132,134]. We previously screened a library of 1280 drugs against six of these filamentous fungi including *Fusarium*, *Scedosporium*, *Rhizopus* and *Lichtheimia* species [135]. The main hits found were antifungals, antiseptics and some antineoplastics against a few strains, and polymyxins [41], disulfiram [95], auranofin [122] and ribavirin [68], as mentioned above. These fungi have fewer hits and further investigations are warranted in order not to reach fatal therapeutic impasses. Some combinations of antibiotics and antifungals, however, displayed strong synergies [65].

## 5. Further Assessment and Prioritization of Repurpose Potential

It is important to highlight in this effort that preliminary in vitro studies, however, encouraging, do not automatically imply repurpose potential. In addition, not all compounds identified above possess equal repurpose potential while others may be altogether inappropriate for the clinical use in question. Given that safety data for marketed drugs and advanced clinical candidates are available, further assessment should be undertaken to evaluate and prioritize each molecule with respect to its repurpose potential. For example, effective auranofin concentrations that inhibited yeasts and molds' growth, ranged from 0.25 to 16 µg/mL [50], but human pharmacokinetics displayed a Cmax of 0.025 µg/mL after 6 mg per day [136]. Aspirin on the other hand was effective against yeasts [44,69] in accordance with human doses and used for a long time now. For analgesic dosages, the Cmax was reported on average at 50 µM (9 mg/L) and were higher for anti-inflammatory use [137]. Another example, quinacrine alone, was effective against *C. albicans* biofilms with MICs between 64 and 256 µg/mL [63]. However, quinacrine pharmacokinetics from an intrapleural dose displayed a Cmax below 1 µg/mL for a 600 mg dose [138] and the therapeutic dose is initially 100 mg, which makes the use of this molecule in monotherapy inappropriate. In spite of that, its use in synergic combinations led to a reduction in the initial dose, from 64 µg/mL alone to 4 µg/mL with caspofungine [105] and approaching acceptable human concentrations. At the current stage, the use of quinacrine as a monotherapy does not reach the reported human concentrations, but the study of its combinations with other molecules is still interesting in view of the reported synergisms. Plasma concentrations of synergistic combinations of azoles or amphotericin B and colistin can be above some previously reported MICs, where human doses of colistin have resulted in serum concentrations up to 32 µg/mL [41]. In such cases, the renal condition of the patient must be considered, although nebulized doses of colistin could avoid this toxicity [139]. Therefore, an analysis process must be applied to all molecules before their repurposing after in vitro, in vivo and other assays. In summary, strict and careful analysis is essential before administration, concerning the consistency between the effective dose and the serum concentration/toxicity dose, but also covering all other parameters related or not to the molecule, such as potential drug interactions, bioavailability of the molecule, strain susceptibility, patient condition and consent, approval of the patient's care panel, etc.
**6. Conclusions**

The emergence of new mycotic agents and the increase in antifungal resistance has led to the need to find new and/or alternative drugs. We are currently seeing that non-traditional antimicrobial agents, previously prescribed to treat non-infectious conditions, may display antimicrobial properties, and it would be a worthwhile investment to further explore these compounds before being repurposed. Otherwise, these reported drugs could serve as a starting point for the reinnovation of a new molecule. We noted compounds ranging from anti-inflammatory to antipsychotic drugs, which have been documented to control fungal growth and to be repositionable. However, their clinical application may be limited to treat life-threatening fungi, due to drug toxicity, especially with anticancer drugs that generally target eukaryotic organisms or with drugs inducing an immuno-suppressive state. Susceptibility testing on each fungus, careful analysis of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) data and human achievable and tolerable concentrations must be confirmed before administration to assess the benefit/risk. All effective treatments should be taken into consideration as a last-line therapy, even if they have side effects, if they could save the patient [140]. Fortunately, in in vitro assays some of these compounds act synergistically with currently used antifungal agents. Thus, combinations enable the use of low concentrations with the advantage of minimizing any possible undesired physiological effects. This also enhances the efficiency of traditional antimicrobial drugs, which are fungistatic when used alone under normal conditions.

Assuming that obstacles may be overcome, drug repurposing is a promising alternative strategy into which further research and clinical trials are essential to combat the increase in invasive fungal infections.

**Author Contributions:** L.P., H.Y., J.-M.R. and F.B. drafted and revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

**Funding:** This work was supported by the French Government under the "Investissements d'avenir" (Investments for the Future) program managed by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR, fr: National Agency for Research), (reference: Méditerranée Infection 10-IAHU-03). This work was supported by Région Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur and European funding (FEDER (Fonds européen de développement régional) PRIMMI (Plateformes de Recherche et d'Innovation Mutualisées Méditerranée Infection)).

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

**Acknowledgments:** We thank our designer Juan Manuel Osorio Rozo for Figures 1 and 2 (https://www behance net/juanmanuelosiorozo, accessed on 18 May 2021).

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

**References**

1. Brown, G.D.; Denning, D.W.; Gow, N.A.R.; Levitz, S.M.; Netea, M.G.; White, T.C. Hidden Killers: Human Fungal Infections. *Sci. Transl. Med.* **2012**, *4*, 165rv13. [CrossRef]

2. Denning, D.W. Calling upon all public health mycologists: To accompany the country burden papers from 14 countries. *Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.* **2017**, *36*, 923–924. [CrossRef]

3. Livio, P.; Morena, C.; Anna, C.; Massimo, O.; Luana, F.; Bruno, M.; Domenico, P.; Marco, P.; Alessandro, B.; Anna, C.; et al. The epidemiology of fungal infections in patients with hematologic malignancies: The SEIFEM-2004 study. *Haematologica* **2006**, *91*, 1068–1075.

4. Armstrong-James, D.; Meintjes, G.; Brown, G.D. A neglected epidemic: Fungal infections in HIV/AIDS. *Trends Microbiol.* **2014**, *22*, 120–127. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5. Geddes-McAlister, J.; Shapiro, R.S. New pathogens, new tricks: Emerging, drug-resistant fungal pathogens and future prospects for antifungal therapeutics. *Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.* **2019**, *1435*, 57–78. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Gupta, R.; Goel, N.; Gupta, A.; Gupta, K.B.; Chaudhary, U.; Sood, S. A rare fungal infiltration of lungs in a healthy young girl. *Case Rep. Pulmonol.* **2011**, *2011*, 1–3. [CrossRef]

7. Srinivasan, A.; Lopez-Ribot, J.L.; Ramasubramanian, A.K. Overcoming antifungal resistance. *Drug Discov. Today Technol.* **2014**, *11*, 65–71. [CrossRef]

8. Alcazar-Fuoli, L.; Mellado, E. Current status of antifungal resistance and its impact on clinical practice. *Br. J. Haematol.* **2014**, *166*, 471–484. [CrossRef]

9. Meurman, J.H.; Hämäläinen, P.; Janket, S.J. Oral infections in older adults. *Aging Health* **2006**, *2*, 1013–1023. [CrossRef]

10. Perfect, J.R. The antifungal pipeline: A reality check. *Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.* **2017**, *16*, 603–616. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11. Sanguinetti, M.; Posteraro, B.; Lass-Flörl, C. Antifungal drug resistance among *Candida* species: Mechanisms and clinical impact. *Mycoses* **2015**, *58*, 2–13. [CrossRef]

12. Barber, A.E.; Riedel, J.; Sae-Ong, T.; Kang, K.; Brabetz, W.; Panagiotou, G.; Deising, H.B.; Kurzai, O. Effects of agricultural fungicide use on *Aspergillus fumigatus*: Abundance, antifungal susceptibility, and population structure. *mBio* **2020**, *11*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

13. Demers, E.G.; Biermann, A.R.; Masonjones, S.; Crocker, A.W.; Ashare, A.; Stajich, J.E.; Hogan, D.A. Evolution of drug resistance in an antifungal-naïve chronic *Candida lusitaniae* infection. *Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA* **2018**, *115*, 12040–12045. [CrossRef]

14. Hall, R.A.; Noverr, M.C. Fungal interactions with the human host: Exploring the spectrum of symbiosis. *Curr. Opin. Microbiol.* **2017**, *40*, 58–64. [CrossRef]

15. Peyclit, L.; Baron, S.A.; Rolain, J.-M. Drug repurposing to fight colistin and carbapenem-resistant bacteria. *Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.* **2019**, *9*, 193. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16. Dimasi, J.A.; Feldman, L.; Seckler, A.; Wilson, A. Trends in risks associated with new drug development: Success rates for investigational drugs. *Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.* **2010**, *87*, 272–277. [CrossRef]

17. Houšť, J.; Spížek, J.; Havlíček, V. Antifungal Drugs. *Metabolites* **2020**, *10*. [CrossRef]

18. Wiederhold, N.P. The antifungal arsenal: Alternative drugs and future targets. *Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents* **2018**, *51*, 333–339. [CrossRef]

19. Rauseo, A.M.; Coler-Reilly, A.; Larson, L.; Spec, A. Hope on the horizon: Novel fungal treatments in development. *Open Forum Infect. Dis.* **2020**, *7*, 1–19. [CrossRef]

20. Su, H.; Han, L.; Huang, X. Potential targets for the development of new antifungal drugs. *J. Antibiot.* **2018**, *71*, 978–991. [CrossRef]

21. Mahboubi, M. *Artemisia sieberi* Besser essential oil and treatment of fungal infections. *Biomed. Pharmacother.* **2017**, *89*, 1422–1430. [CrossRef]

22. D'agostino, M.; Tesse, N.; Frippiat, J.P.; Machouart, M.; Debourgogne, A. Essential oils and their natural active compounds presenting antifungal properties. *Molecules* **2019**, *24*, 3713. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

23. Córdoba, S.; Vivot, W.; Szusz, W.; Albo, G. Antifungal activity of essential oils against *Candida* species isolated from clinical samples. *Mycopathologia* **2019**, *184*, 615–623. [CrossRef]

24. Barac, A.; Donadu, M.; Usai, D.; Spiric, V.T.; Mazzarello, V.; Zanetti, S.; Aleksic, E.; Stevanovic, G.; Nikolic, N.; Rubino, S. Antifungal activity of *Myrtus communis* against *Malassezia* sp. isolated from the skin of patients with pityriasis versicolor. *Infection* **2018**, *46*, 253–257. [CrossRef]

25. González-Burgos, E.; Gómez-Serranillos, M.P. Natural Products for Vulvovaginal Candidiasis Treatment: Evidence from Clinical Trials. *Curr. Top. Med. Chem.* **2018**, *18*, 1324–1332. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

26. Pushpakom, S.; Iorio, F.; Eyers, P.A.; Escott, K.J.; Hopper, S.; Wells, A.; Doig, A.; Guilliams, T.; Latimer, J.; McNamee, C.; et al. Drug repurposing: Progress, challenges and recommendations. *Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.* **2018**, *18*, 41–58. [CrossRef]

27. Gill, R.; Amberkar Mohan Babu, V.; Meena Kumari, K. Assets and liabilities of drug repositioning. *Int. J. Pharma Bio Sci.* **2016**, *7*, 47–53. [CrossRef]

28. Nett, J.E.; Andes, D.R. Antifungal Agents: Spectrum of activity, pharmacology, and clinical indications. *Infect. Dis. Clin. N. Am.* **2016**, *30*, 51–83. [CrossRef]

29. Kuriyama, T.; Karasawa, T.; Williams, D.W. Antimicrobial Chemotherapy: Significance to Healthcare. In *Biofilms in Infection Prevention and Control: A Healthcare Handbook*; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 209–244. ISBN 9780123970435.

30. Scorzoni, L.; de Paula e Silva, A.C.A.; Marcos, C.M.; Assato, P.A.; de Melo, W.C.M.A.; de Oliveira, H.C.; Costa-Orlandi, C.B.; Mendes-Giannini, M.J.S.; Fusco-Almeida, A.M. Antifungal therapy: New advances in the understanding and treatment of mycosis. *Front. Microbiol.* **2017**, *8*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

31. Rudramurthy, S.M.; Paul, R.A.; Chakrabarti, A.; Mouton, J.W.; Meis, J.F. Invasive aspergillosis by *Aspergillus flavus*: Epidemiology, diagnosis, antifungal resistance, and management. *J. Fungi* **2019**, *5*, 55. [CrossRef]

32. Allen, D.; Wilson, D.; Drew, R.; Perfect, J. Azole antifungals: 35 years of invasive fungal infection management. *Expert Rev. Anti Infect. Ther.* **2015**, *13*, 787–798. [CrossRef]

33. Ghannoum, M.A.; Rice, L.B. Antifungal agents: Mode of action, mechanisms of resistance, and correlation of these mechanisms with bacterial resistance. *Clin. Microbiol. Rev.* **1999**, *12*, 501–517. [CrossRef]

34. Kanafani, Z.A.; Perfect, J.R. Resistance to antifungal agents: Mechanisms and clinical impact. *Clin. Infect. Dis.* **2008**, *46*, 120–128. [CrossRef]

35. Yu, D.T.; Peterson, J.F.; Seger, D.L.; Gerth, W.C.; Bates, D.W. Frequency of potential azole drug-drug interactions of potential fluconazole drug interactions. *Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf.* **2005**, *14*, 755–767. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
36. Canuto, M.M.; Rodero, F.G. Antifungal drug resistance to azoles and polyenes. *Lancet Infect. Dis.* **2002**, *2*, 550–563. [CrossRef]

37. Aguilar-Zapata, D.; Petraitiene, R.; Petraitis, V. Echinocandins: The expanding antifungal armamentarium. *Clin. Infect. Dis.* **2015**, *61*, S604–S611. [CrossRef]

38. Chassot, F.; Venturini, T.P.; Piasentin, F.B.; Santurio, J.M.; Svidzinski, T.I.E.; Alves, S.H. Activity of antifungal agents alone and in combination against echinocandin-susceptible and -resistant *Candida parapsilosis* strains. *Rev. Iberoam. Micol.* **2019**, *36*, 44–47. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

39. Ciliberto, G.; Mancini, R.; Paggi, M.G. Drug repurposing against COVID-19: Focus on anticancer agents. *J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res.* **2020**, *39*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

40. Baron, S.; Hadjadj, L.; Rolain, J.-M.; Olaitan, A.O. Molecular mechanisms of polymyxin resistance: Knowns and unknowns. *Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents* **2016**, *48*, 583–591. [CrossRef]

41. Yousfi, H.; Ranque, S.; Rolain, J.M.; Bittar, F. *In vitro* polymyxin activity against clinical multidrug-resistant fungi. *Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control* **2019**, *8*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

42. Bibi, M.; Murphy, S.; Benhamou, R.I.; Rosenberg, A.; Ulman, A.; Bicanic, T.; Fridman, M.; Berman, J. Combining Colistin and Fluconazole Synergistically Increases Fungal Membrane Permeability and Antifungal Cidality. *ACS Infect. Dis.* **2021**, *7*. [CrossRef]

43. Tournu, H.; Carroll, J.; Latimer, B.; Dragoi, A.M.; Dykes, S.; Cardelli, J.; Peters, T.L.; Eberle, K.E.; Palmer, G.E. Identification of small molecules that disrupt vacuolar function in the pathogen *Candida albicans*. *PLoS ONE* **2017**, *12*. [CrossRef]

44. Pic, E.; Burgain, A.; Sellam, A. Repurposing the anthelminthic salicylanilide oxyclozanide against susceptible and clinical resistant *Candida albicans* strains. *Med. Mycol.* **2019**, *57*, 387–390. [CrossRef]

45. Weber, S.M.; Levitz, S.M.; Harrison, T.S. Chloroquine and the fungal phagosome. *Curr. Opin. Microbiol.* **2000**, *3*, 349–353. [CrossRef]

46. Shinde, R.B.; Raut, J.S.; Chauhan, N.M.; Karuppayil, S.M. Chloroquine sensitizes biofilms of *Candida albicans* to antifungal azoles. *Braz. J. Infect. Dis.* **2013**, *17*, 395–400. [CrossRef]

47. Huang, Z.; Srinivasan, S.; Zhang, J.; Chen, K.; Li, Y.; Li, W.; Quiocho, F.A.; Pan, X. Discovering thiamine transporters as targets of chloroquine using a novel functional genomics strategy. *PLoS Genet.* **2012**, *8*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

48. Joffe, L.S.; Schneider, R.; Lopes, W.; Azevedo, R.; Staats, C.C.; Kmetzsch, L.; Schrank, A.; Del Poeta, M.; Vainstein, M.H.; Rodrigues, M.L. The anti-helminthic compound mebendazole has multiple antifungal effects against *Cryptococcus neoformans*. *Front. Microbiol.* **2017**, *8*. [CrossRef]

49. Wall, G.; Chaturvedi, A.K.; Wormley, F.L.; Wiederhold, N.P.; Patterson, H.P.; Patterson, T.F.; Lopez-Ribot, J.L. Screening a repurposing library for inhibitors of multidrug-resistant *Candida auris* identifies ebselen as a repositionable candidate for antifungal drug development. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2018**, *62*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

50. Wiederhold, N.P.; Patterson, T.F.; Srinivasan, A.; Chaturvedi, A.K.; Fothergill, A.W.; Wormley, F.L.; Ramasubramanian, A.K.; Lopez-Ribot, J.L. Repurposing auranofin as an antifungal: *In vitro* activity against a variety of medically important fungi. *Virulence* **2017**, *8*, 138–142. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

51. Ogundeji, A.O.; Pohl, C.H.; Sebolai, O.M. Repurposing of aspirin and ibuprofen as candidate anti-Cryptococcus drugs. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2016**, *60*, 4799–4808. [CrossRef]

52. Pina-Vaz, C.; Sansonetto, F.; Rodrigues, A.G.; Martinez-De-Oliveira, J.; Fonseca, A.F.; Mårdh, P.A. Antifungal activity of ibuprofen alone and in combination with fluconazole against Candida species. *J. Med. Microbiol.* **2000**, *49*, 831–840. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

53. Singh, S.; Fatima, Z.; Ahmad, K.; Hameed, S. Repurposing of respiratory drug theophylline against *Candida albicans*: Mechanistic insights unveil alterations in membrane properties and metabolic fitness. *J. Appl. Microbiol.* **2020**, *129*, 860–875. [CrossRef]

54. Stylianou, M.; Kulesskiy, E.; Lopes, J.P.; Granlund, M.; Wennerberg, K.; Urban, C.F. Antifungal application of nonantifungal drugs. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2014**, *58*, 1055–1062. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

55. Ji, C.; Liu, N.; Tu, J.; Li, Z.; Han, G.; Li, J.; Sheng, C. Drug Repurposing of Haloperidol: Discovery of New Benzocyclane Derivatives as Potent Antifungal Agents against Cryptococcosis and Candidiasis. *ACS Infect. Dis.* **2019**, *6*. [CrossRef]

56. Zhai, B.; Wu, C.; Wang, L.; Sachs, M.S.; Lin, X. The antidepressant sertraline provides a promising therapeutic option for neurotropic cryptococcal infections. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2012**, *56*, 3758–3766. [CrossRef]

57. Villanueva-Lozano, H.; González, G.M.; Espinosa-Mora, J.E.; Bodden-Mendoza, B.A.; Andrade, A.; Martínez-Reséndez, M.F.; Treviño-Rangel, R.D.J. Evaluation of the expanding spectrum of sertraline against uncommon fungal pathogens. *J. Infect. Chemother.* **2020**, *26*, 309–311. [CrossRef]

58. Vitale, R.G.; Afeltra, J.; Meis, J.F.G.M.; Verweij, P.E. Activity and post antifungal effect of chlorpromazine and trifluopherazine against *Aspergillus*, *Scedosporium* and *zygomycetes*. *Mycoses* **2007**, *50*, 270–276. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

59. Galgóczy, L.; Bácsi, A.; Homa, M.; Virágh, M.; Papp, T.; Vágvölgyi, C. *In vitro* antifungal activity of phenothiazines and their combination with amphotericin B against different Candida species. *Mycoses* **2011**, *54*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

60. Butts, A.; Koselny, K.; Chabrier-Roselló, Y.; Semighini, C.P.; Brown, J.C.S.; Wang, X.; Annadurai, S.; DiDone, L.; Tabroff, J.; Childers, W.E.; et al. Estrogen receptor antagonists are anti-cryptococcal agents that directly bind EF hand proteins and synergize with fluconazole *in vivo*. *mBio* **2014**, *5*. [CrossRef]

61. Dolan, K.; Montgomery, S.; Buchheit, B.; DiDone, L.; Wellington, M.; Krysan, D.J. Antifungal activity of tamoxifen: *In vitro* and *in vivo* activities and mechanistic characterization. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2009**, *53*, 3337–3346. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
62. Liu, Q.; Guo, X.; Jiang, G.; Wu, G.; Miao, H.; Liu, K.; Chen, S.; Sakamoto, N.; Kuno, T.; Yao, F.; et al. NADPH-cytochrome P450 reductase ccr1 is a target of tamoxifen and participates in its antifungal activity via regulating cell wall integrity in fission yeast. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2020**, *64*. [CrossRef]

63. Shukla, S.; Sauna, Z.E.; Prasad, R.; Ambudkar, S.V. Disulfiram is a potent modulator of multidrug transporter Cdr1p of *Candida albicans*. *Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.* **2004**, *322*, 520–525. [CrossRef]

64. Sauna, Z.E.; Shukla, S.; Ambudkar, S.V. Disulfiram, an old drug with new potential therapeutic uses for human cancers and fungal infections. *Mol. Biosyst.* **2005**, *1*, 127–134. [CrossRef]

65. Rossato, L.; Camargo dos Santos, M.; Vitale, R.G.; de Hoog, S.; Ishida, K. Alternative treatment of fungal infections: Synergy with non-antifungal agents. *Mycoses* **2020**. [CrossRef]

66. Rossi, S.A.; De Oliveira, H.C.; Agreda-Mellon, D.; Lucio, J.; Soares Mendes-Giannini, M.J.; García-Cambero, J.P.; Zaragoza, O. Identification of off-patent drugs that show synergism with amphotericin B or that present antifungal action against *Cryptococcus neoformans* and *Candida spp.*. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2020**, *64*. [CrossRef]

67. Te, H.S.; Randall, G.; Jensen, D.M. Mechanism of action of ribavirin in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. *Gastroenterol. Hepatol.* **2007**, *3*, 218–225.

68. Yousfi, H.; Cassagne, C.; Ranque, S.; Rolain, J.M.; Bittar, F. Repurposing of ribavirin as an adjunct therapy against invasive *Candida* strains in an *in vitro* study. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2019**, *63*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

69. Swan, G.E. The pharmacology of halogenated salicylanilides and their anthelmintic use in animals. *J. S. Afr. Vet. Assoc.* **1999**, *70*, 61–70. [CrossRef]

70. Ayerbe-Algaba, R.; Gil-Marqués, M.L.; Miró-Canturri, A.; Parra-Millán, R.; Pachón-Ibáñez, M.E.; Jiménez-Méjías, M.E.; Pachón, J.; Smani, Y. The anthelmintic oxyclozanide restores the activity of colistin against colistin-resistant Gram-negative bacilli. *Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents* **2019**, *54*, 507–512. [CrossRef]

71. ANSES RCP—DOUVISTOME. Available online: http://www.ircp.anmv.anses.fr/rcp.aspx?NomMedicament=DOUVISTOME (accessed on 17 February 2021).

72. Rolain, J.M.; Colson, P.; Raoult, D. Recycling of chloroquine and its hydroxyl analogue to face bacterial, fungal and viral infections in the 21st century. *Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents* **2007**, *30*, 297–308. [CrossRef]

73. Plantone, D.; Koudriavtseva, T. Current and Future Use of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in Infectious, Immune, Neoplastic, and Neurological Diseases: A Mini-Review. *Clin. Drug Investig.* **2018**, *38*, 653–671. [CrossRef]

74. Shinde, R.B.; Rajput, S.B.; Raut, J.S.; Mohan Karuppayil, S. An in vitro repositioning study reveals antifungal potential of chloroquine to inhibit growth and morphogenesis in *Candida albicans*. *J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol.* **2013**, *59*, 167–170. [CrossRef]

75. Bai, R.Y.; Staedtke, V.; Wanjiku, T.; Rudek, M.A.; Joshi, A.; Gallia, G.L.; Riggins, G.J. Brain penetration and efficacy of different mebendazole polymorphs in a mouse brain tumor model. *Clin. Cancer Res.* **2015**, *21*, 3462–3470. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

76. Scott, E.M.; Tariq, V.N.; McCrory, R.M. Demonstration of synergy with fluconazole and either ibuprofen, sodium salicylate, or propylparaben against *Candida albicans* *in vitro*. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **1995**, *39*, 2610–2614. [CrossRef]

77. Torres, N.S.; Abercrombie, J.J.; Srinivasan, A.; Lopez-Ribot, J.L.; Ramasubramanian, A.K.; Leung, K.P. Screening a commercial library of pharmacologically active small molecules against *Staphylococcus aureus* biofilms. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2016**, *60*, 5663–5672. [CrossRef]

78. She, P.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Tan, F.; Luo, Z.; Wu, Y. Antibiofilm efficacy of the gold compound auranofin on dual species biofilms of *Staphylococcus aureus* and *Candida* spp. *J. Appl. Microbiol.* **2020**, *128*, 88–101. [CrossRef]

79. Holbrook, S.Y.L.; Garzan, A.; Dennis, E.K.; Shrestha, S.K.; Garneau-Tsodikova, S. Repurposing antipsychotic drugs into antifungal agents: Synergistic combinations of azoles and bromperidol derivatives in the treatment of various fungal infections. *Eur. J. Med. Chem.* **2017**, *139*, 12–21. [CrossRef]

80. Rhein, J.; Nielsen, K.; Boulware, D.R.; Meya, D.B. Sertraline for HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis—Authors’ reply. *Lancet Infect. Dis.* **2016**, *16*, 1111–1112. [CrossRef]

81. Moraes, D.C.; Ferreira-Pereira, A. Insights on the anticandidal activity of non-antifungal drugs. *J. Mycol. Med.* **2019**, *29*, 253–259. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

82. da Rosa, T.F.; Machado, C.; de, S.; Serafin, M.B.; Bottega, A.; Foletto, V.S.; Coelho, S.S.; Hörner, R. Repositioning or Redirection of Antidepressant Drugs in the Treatment of Bacterial and Fungal Infections. *Am. J. Ther.* **2020**, *27*, e528–e532. [CrossRef]

83. Nayak, R.; Xu, J. Effects of sertraline hydrochloride and fluconazole combinations on *Cryptococcus neoformans* and *Cryptococcus gattii*. *Mycology* **2010**, *1*, 99–105. [CrossRef]

84. Rossato, L.; Loreto, É.S.; Zanette, R.A.; Chassot, F.; Santurio, J.M.; Alves, S.H. *In vitro* synergistic effects of chlorpromazine and sertraline in combination with amphotericin B against *Cryptococcus neoformans* var. *grubii*. *Folia Microbiol. (Praha)* **2016**, *61*, 399–403. [CrossRef]

85. Rhein, J.; Huppler Hullsiek, K.; Tugume, L.; Nuwagira, E.; Mpoza, E.; Evans, E.E.; Kiggundu, R.; Pastick, K.A.; Ssebambulidde, K.; Akampurira, A.; et al. Adjunctive sertraline for HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis: A randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial. *Lancet Infect. Dis.* **2019**, *19*, 843–851. [CrossRef]

86. Boulware, D.R.; Nalintya, E.; Rajasingham, R.; Kirumira, P.; Naluyima, R.; Turya, F.; Namanda, S.; Rutakingirwa, M.K.; Skipper, C.P.; Nikweri, Y.; et al. Adjunctive sertraline for asymptomatic cryptococcal antigenemia: A randomized clinical trial. *Med. Mycol.* **2020**, *58*, 1037–1043. [CrossRef]
87. Homa, M.; Galgóczy, L.; Tóth, E.; Tóth, L.; Papp, T.; Chandrasekaran, M.; Kadaikunnan, S.; Alharbi, N.S.; Vágvölgyi, C. In vitro antifungal activity of antipsychotic drugs and their combinations with conventional antifungals against *Scedosporium* and *Pseudallescheria* isolates. *Med. Mycol.* **2015**, *53*, 890–895. [CrossRef]

88. Montoya, M.C.; Krysan, D.J. Repurposing estrogen receptor antagonists for the treatment of infectious disease. *mBio* **2018**, *9*, [CrossRef]

89. Butts, A.; Martin, J.A.; DiDone, L.; Bradley, E.K.; Mutz, M.; Krysan, D.J. Structure-Activity Relationships for the Antifungal Activity of Selective Estrogen Receptor Antagonists Related to Tamoxifen. *PLoS ONE* **2015**, *10*. [CrossRef]

90. Quezada, H.; Martínez-Vázquez, M.; López-Jácome, E.; González-Pedrajo, B.; Andrade, Á.; Fernández-Presas, A.M.; Tovar-García, A.; García-Contreras, R. Repurposed anti-cancer drugs: The future for anti-infective therapy? *Expert Rev. Anti Infect. Ther.* **2020**, *18*, 609–612. [CrossRef]

91. Ngan, N.T.T.; Mai, N.T.H.; Tung, N.L.N.; Lan, N.P.H.; Tai, L.T.H.; Phu, N.H.; Chau, N.V.V.; Binh, T.Q.; Hung, L.Q.; Beardsley, J.; et al. A randomized open label trial of tamoxifen combined with amphotericin B and fluconazole for cryptococcal meningitis. *Wellcome Open Res.* **2019**, *4*. [CrossRef]

92. de Oliveira Neto, A.S.; Souza, I.L.A.; Amorim, M.E.S.; de Freitas Souza, T.; Rocha, V.N.; do Couto, R.O.; Fabri, R.L.; de Freitas Araújo, M.G. Antifungal efficacy of atorvastatin-containing emulgel in the treatment of oral and vulvovaginal candidiasis. *Med. Mycol.* **2020**. [CrossRef]

93. Macreadie, I.G.; Johnson, G.; Schlosser, T.; Macreadie, P.I. Growth inhibition of *Candida* species and *Aspergillus fumigatus* by statins. *FEMS Microbiol. Lett.* **2006**, *262*, 9–13. [CrossRef]

94. de Queiroz Ribeiro, N.; Costa, M.C.; Magalhães, T.F.F.; Carneiro, H.C.S.; Oliveira, L.V.; Fontes, A.C.L.; Santos, J.R.A.; Ferreira, G.F.; de Sousa Araujo, G.R.; Alves, V.; et al. Atorvastatin as a promising anticryptococcal agent. *Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents* **2017**, *49*, 695–702. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

95. Khan, S.; Singhal, S.; Mathur, T.; Upadhyay, D.J.; Rattan, A. Antifungal potential of disulfiram. *Jpn. J. Med. Mycol.* **2007**, *48*, 109–113. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

96. Hao, W.; Qiao, D.; Han, Y.; Du, N.; Li, X.; Fan, Y.; Ge, X.; Zhang, H. Identification of disulfiram as a potential antifungal drug by screening small molecular libraries. *J. Infect. Chemother.* **2020**. [CrossRef]

97. Blanc, M.; Daeppen, J.-B. Does disulfiram still have a role in alcoholism treatment? *Rev. Med. Suisse* **2005**, *1*, 1728–1730.

98. Talbot, G.H.; Bradley, J.; Edwards, J.E.; Gilbert, D.; Scheid, M.; Bartlett, J.G. Bad bugs need drugs: An update on the development pipeline from the Antimicrobial Availability Task Force of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. *Clin. Infect. Dis.* **2006**, *42*, 657–668. [CrossRef]

99. Osei Sekyere, *J. Candida auris*: A systematic review and meta-analysis of current updates on an emerging multidrug-resistant pathogen. *Microbiologyopen* **2018**, *7*. [CrossRef]

100. Ramirez-Garcia, A.; Pellon, A.; Rementeria, A.; Buldain, I.; Barreto-Bergter, E.; Rollin-Pinheiro, R.; De Meirelles, J.V.; Xisto, M.I.D.S.; Ranque, S.; Havlicek, V.; et al. *Scedosporium* and *Lomentospora*: An updated overview of underrated opportunists. *Med. Mycol.* **2018**, *56*, S102–S125. [CrossRef]

101. Nobile, C.J.; Johnson, A.D. *Candida albicans* Biofilms and Human Disease. *Annu. Rev. Microbiol.* **2015**, *69*, 71–92. [CrossRef]

102. Kathwate, G.H.; Shinde, R.B.; Mohan Karuppayil, S. Non-antifungal drugs inhibit growth, morphogenesis and biofilm formation in *Candida albicans*. *J. Antibiot.* **2021**, *1*, 8–10. [CrossRef]

103. Kim, J.H.; Cheng, L.W.; Chan, K.L.; Tam, C.C.; Mahoney, N.; Friedman, M.; Shilman, M.M.; Land, K.M. Antifungal Drug Repurposing. *Antibiotics* **2020**, *9*, 812. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

104. Stepanović, S.; Vuković, D.; Ješić, M.; Ranin, L. Influence of acetylsalicylic acid (Aspirin) on biofilm production by *Candida* species. *J. Chemother.* **2004**, *16*, 134–138. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

105. Kulkarny, V.V.; Chavez-Dozal, A.; Rane, H.S.; Jahng, M.; Bernardo, S.M.; Parra, K.J.; Lee, S.A. Quinacrine inhibits *Candida albicans* growth and filamentation at neutral pH. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2014**, *58*, 7501–7509. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

106. Holanda, M.A.V.; Da Silva, C.R.; De A Neto, J.B.; Do Av Sá, L.G.; Do Nascimento, F.B.S.A.; Barroso, D.D.; Da Silva, L.J.; Cândido, T.M.; Leitão, A.C.; Barbosa, A.D.; et al. Evaluation of the antifungal activity in vitro of midazolam against fluconazole-resistant *Candida* spp. isolates. *Future Microbiol.* **2021**, *16*, 71–81. [CrossRef]

107. Juvêncio da Silva, L.; Dias Barroso, F.D.; Vieira, L.S.; Carlos Mota, D.R.; da Silva Firmino, B.K.; Rocha da Silva, C.; de Farias Cabral, V.P.; Cândido, T.M.; Sá, L.G.D.A.V.; Barbosa da Silva, W.M.; et al. Diazepam's antifungal activity in fluconazole-resistant *Candida* spp. and biofilm inhibition in *C. albicans*: Evaluation of the relationship with the proteins ALS3 and SAP5. *J. Med. Microbiol.* **2021**. [CrossRef]

108. Chavez-Dozal, A.A.; Jahng, M.; Rane, H.S.; Asare, K.; Kulkarny, V.V.; Bernardo, S.M.; Lee, S.A. In vitro analysis of flufenamic acid activity against *Candida albicans* biofilms. *Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents* **2014**, *43*, 86–91. [CrossRef]

109. Do Amaral Valente Sá, L.G.; Da Silva, C.R.; De Andrade Neto, J.B.; Do Nascimento, F.B.S.A.; Barroso, F.D.D.; Da Silva, L.J.; De Farias Cabral, V.P.; Barbosa, A.D.; Silva, J.; Marinho, E.S.; et al. Antifungal activity of etomidate against growing biofilms of fluconazole-resistant *Candida* spp. strains, binding to mannoproteins and molecular docking with the ALS3 protein. *J. Med. Microbiol.* **2020**, *69*, 1221–1227. [CrossRef]

110. Chavez-Dozal, A.A.; Lown, L.; Jahng, M.; Walraven, C.J.; Lee, S.A. *In vitro* analysis of finasteride activity against *Candida albicans* urinary biofilm formation and filamentation. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2014**, *58*, 5855–5862. [CrossRef]
111. Nile, C.; Falleni, M.; Cirasola, D.; Alghamdi, A.; Anderson, O.F.; Delaney, C.; Ramage, G.; Ottaviano, E.; Tosi, D.; Bulfamante, G.; et al. Repurposing Pilocarpine Hydrochloride for Treatment of *Candida albicans* Infections. *mSphere* **2019**, *4*. [CrossRef]

112. Machado, C.B.; da Silva, C.R.; Barroso, F.D.; Campos, R.D.S.; Sá, L.V.; do Nascimento, F.A.; Cavalcanti, B.C.; Júnior, H.V.N.; Neto, J.A. In vitro evaluation of anti-fungal activity of tropicamide against strains of *Candida* spp. resistant to fluconazole in planktonic and biofilm form. *J. Mycol. Med.* **2021**, *31*. [CrossRef]

113. Rajasekharan, S.K.; Lee, J.H.; Lee, J. Aripiprazole repurposed as an inhibitor of biofilm formation and sterol biosynthesis in multidrug-resistant Candida albicans. *Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents* **2019**, *54*, 518–523. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

114. Lone, S.A.; Ahmad, A. *Candida auris*—the growing menace to global health. *Mycoses* **2019**, *62*, 620–637. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

115. Lockhart, S.R. *Candida auris* and multidrug resistance: Defining the new normal. *Fungal Genet. Biol.* **2019**, *131*. [CrossRef]

116. Kean, R.; Ramage, G. Combined Antifungal Resistance and Biofilm Tolerance: The Global Threat of *Candida auris*. *mSphere* **2019**, *4*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

117. Allaw, F.; Kara Zahreddine, N.; Ibrahim, A.; Tannous, J.; Taleb, H.; Bizri, A.R.; Dbaibo, G.; Kanj, S.S. First *Candida auris* Outbreak during a COVID-19 Pandemic in a Tertiary-Care Center in Lebanon. *Pathogens* **2021**, *10*, 157. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

118. Cheng, Y.-S.; Roma, J.S.; Shen, M.; Fernandes, C.M.; Tsang, P.S.; Forbes, H.E.; Boshoff, H.; Lazzarini, C.; Del Poeta, M.; Zheng, W.; et al. Identification of Antifungal Compounds against Multidrug Resistant *Candida auris* Utilizing a High Throughput Drug Repurposing Screen. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2021**. [CrossRef]

119. Eldesouky, H.E.; Lanman, N.A.; Hazbun, T.R.; Seleem, M.N. Aprepitant, an antiemetic agent, interferes with metal ion homeostasis of *Candida auris* and displays potent synergistic interactions with azole drugs. *Virulence* **2020**, *11*, 1466–1481. [CrossRef]

120. Eldesouky, H.E.; Salama, E.A.; Lanman, N.A.; Hazbun, T.R.; Seleem, M.N. Potent synergistic interactions between lopinavir and azole antifungal drugs against emerging multidrug-resistant *Candida auris*. *Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.* **2021**, *65*. [CrossRef]

121. Gowri, M.; Jayashree, B.; Jeyakanthan, J.; Girija, E.K. Sertraline as a promising antifungal agent: Inhibition of growth and biofilm of Candida auris with special focus on the mechanism of action in vitro. *J. Appl. Microbiol.* **2020**, *128*, 426–437. [CrossRef]

122. Kim, J.H.; Chan, K.L.; Cheng, L.W.; Tell, L.A.; Byrne, B.A.; Clothier, K.; Land, K.M. High efficiency drug repurposing design for new antifungal agents. *Methods Protoc.* **2019**, *2*, 31. [CrossRef]

123. Vermorel-Faure, O.; Lebeau, B.; Mallaret, M.R.; Michallet, M.; Brut, A.; Ambroise-Thomas, P.; Grillot, R. Food-related fungal infection risk in agranulocytosis. *Mycological control* of 273 food items offered to patients hospitalized in sterile units. *Press. Med.* **1993**, *22*, 157–160.

124. Meis, J.F.; Chowdhary, A.; Rhodes, J.L.; Fisher, M.C.; Verweij, P.E. Clinical implications of globally emerging azole resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus. *Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci.* **2016**, *371*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

125. De Lucca, A.J. Harmful fungi in both agriculture and medicine. *Rev. Iberoam. Micol.* **2007**, *24*, 3–13. [CrossRef]

126. Perlin, D.S.; Rautemaa-Richardson, R.; Alastruey-Izquierdo, A. The global problem of antifungal resistance: Prevalence, mechanisms, and management. *Lancet Infect. Dis.* **2017**, *17*, e383–e392. [CrossRef]

127. Osharov, N.; Kontoyiannis, D.P. The anti-*Aspergillus* drug pipeline: Is the glass half full or empty? *Med. Mycol.* **2017**, *55*, 118–124. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

128. Vallières, C.; Singh, N.; Alexander, C.; Avery, S.V. Repurposing Nonantifungal Approved Drugs for Synergistic Targeting of Fungal Pathogens. *ACS Infect. Dis.* **2020**, *6*, 2950–2958. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

129. May, R.C.; Stone, N.R.H.; Wiesner, D.L.; Bicanic, T.; Nielsen, K. *Cryptococcus*: From environmental saprophyte to global pathogen. *Nat. Rev. Microbiol.* **2016**, *14*, 106–117. [CrossRef]

130. Spadari, C.D.C.; Wirth, F.; Lopes, L.B.; Ishida, K. New approaches for cryptococcosis treatment. *Microorganisms* **2020**, *8*, 613. [CrossRef]

131. Truong, M.; Monahan, L.G.; Carter, D.A.; Charles, I.G. Repurposing drugs to fast-track therapeutic agents for the treatment of cryptococcosis. *PeerJ* **2018**, *2018*. [CrossRef]

132. Tortorano, A.M.; Richardson, M.; Roilides, E.; van Diepeningen, A.; Caira, M.; Munoz, P.; Johnson, E.; Meletiadis, J.; Pana, Z.D.; Lackner, M.; et al. ESCMID and ECMM joint guidelines on diagnosis and management of hyalohyphomycosis: Fusarium spp., Scedosporium spp. and others. *Clin. Microbiol. Infect.* **2014**, *20*, 27–46. [CrossRef]

133. Douglas, A.P.; Chen, C.-A.; Slavin, M.A. Emerging infections caused by non-*Aspergillus* filamentous fungi. *Clin. Microbiol. Infect.* **2016**, *22*, 670–680. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

134. Shinohara, M.M.; George, E. *Scedosporium apiospermum*: An emerging opportunistic pathogen that must be distinguished from *Aspergillus* and other hyalohyphomycetes. *J. Cutan. Pathol.* **2009**, *36*, 39–41. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

135. Yousfi, H.; Ranque, S.; Cassagne, C.; Rolain, J.M.; Bittar, F. Identification of repositionable drugs with novel antimycotic activity by screening the Prestwick Chemical Library against emerging invasive moulds. *J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist.* **2020**, *21*, 314–317. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

136. Torres, N.S.; Montelongo-Jauregui, D.; Abercrombie, J.J.; Srinivasan, A.; Lopez-Ribot, J.L.; Ramasubramanian, A.K.; Leung, K.P. Antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity of synergistic combinations of a commercially available small compound library with colistin against *Pseudomonas aeruginosa*. *Front. Microbiol.* **2018**, *9*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

137. Dovizio, M.; Bruno, A.; Tacconelli, S.; Patrignani, P. Mode of action of aspirin as a chemopreventive agent. *Recent Results Cancer Res.* **2013**, *191*, 39–65. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
138. Bjorkman, S.; Ove Elisson, L.; Gabrielsson, J. Pharmacokinetics of Quinacrine after Intrapleural Instillation in Rabbits and Man. *J. Pharm. Pharmacol.* **1989**, *41*, 160–163. [CrossRef]

139. Steinfort, D.P.; Steinfort, C. Effect of long-term nebulized colistin on lung function and quality of life in patients with chronic bronchial sepsis. *Intern. Med. J.* **2007**, *37*, 495–498. [CrossRef]

140. Rolain, J.M.; Baquero, F. The refusal of the Society to accept antibiotic toxicity: Missing opportunities for therapy of severe infections. *Clin. Microbiol. Infect.* **2016**, *22*, 423–427. [CrossRef]