ArticleIndian journal of dermatology2008
Comparison of the activities of four antifungal agents in an in vitro model of dermatophyte nail infection.
Article in Indian journal of dermatology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular study and antifungal susceptibility profile ofIranian journal of microbiology · 2022Article
- Prevalence of Dermatophytosis and Antifungal Activity of Ethanolic Crude Leaf Extract ofDermatology research and practice · 2019Article
- Antifungal drug susceptibility profile of clinically important dermatophytes and determination of point mutations in terbinafine-resistant isolates.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018Article
- Molecular Characterization and In Vitro Antifungal Susceptibility of 316 Clinical Isolates of Dermatophytes in Iran.Mycopathologia · 2016Article
- In-vitro Activity of 10 Antifungal Agents against 320 Dermatophyte Strains Using Microdilution Method in Tehran.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOnychomycosis is a difficult condition to treat and cure rates are disappointing. Moreover fungicidal action of antifungal agents in NCCLS assays and their rapid accumulation in nails in vivo are not compatible with the duration of treatment.
aimsThis study aimed to find the effectiveness of 4 different antifungal agents in an in vitro model with some similarities to in vivo conditions. MATERIALS AND
methodsStrains of Trichophyton rubrum I-III, Trichophyton mentagrophytes (usual form), Trichophyton mentagrophytes 73, Epidermophyton Flucosom, Microsporum Canis, and Trichophyton Schoenleini which were isolated from the nails of patients, were hired. Inocula suspensions were prepared from 7 to 14 day-old cultures of dermatophytes. Antifungal agents including fluconazole, ketoconazole, terbinafine, and griseofulvin were obtained as standard powders. For each antifungal agent, initial MIC was calculated by registering the optical density for 10 two-fold serially diluted forms which was incubated with diluted fungal suspensions with RPMI 1640. Human nail powder inoculated with different strains and incubated in RPMI 1640 and different concentrations of antifungal drugs for 4 weeks. Final MIC at different steps of 1, 2, 3 and 4 weeks were investigated.
resultsThe final MIC that resulted from the incubation of dermatophytes with nail powder was much more than the initial which was concluded from conventional MIC assay. Terbinafine had the lowest rate of initial and final MICs.
conclusionThe model described here may present more similar conditions to clinical fungal infections; therefore the results such as MIC may be more helpful for hiring the most effective antifungal agent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.