Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42786249›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2026

Antifungal pulse therapy for onychomycosis: a narrative review.

Anushka Koshy, Ashwin Kamath

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Anushka KoshyDepartment of Pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Ashwin KamathDepartment of Pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India. ashwin.kamath@manipal.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9609-0199

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOnychomycosis is a common chronic fungal infection of the nail unit that may be associated with significant functional impairment and impaired quality of life. Systemic antifungal drugs remain the cornerstone of treatment for moderate-to-severe disease, with continuous oral terbinafine and pulse itraconazole being the most widely used systemic antifungals. Pulse regimens involve intermittent administration of relatively high doses of antifungals with the aim of reducing cumulative drug exposure, treatment costs, and treatment burden while maintaining efficacy. However, the comparative effectiveness of pulse and continuous regimens remains unclear. This narrative review summarizes the current evidence regarding antifungal pulse therapy for onychomycosis.

methodsA literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases to identify relevant randomized trials, comparative studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, observational studies, and case reports/case series published between March 2001 and April 2026. Evidence relating to treatment regimens, pharmacologic rationale, efficacy, and safety was reviewed and synthesized.

resultsThe available evidence suggests that pulse therapy is an effective treatment option for onychomycosis. Among the currently available pulse regimens, itraconazole has the strongest supporting evidence and has demonstrated clinical and mycological outcomes comparable to continuous therapy in selected patient populations. Modified pulse schedules, prolonged regimens, and combination approaches incorporating topical antifungal agents have also shown promising results. In contrast, evidence supporting pulse terbinafine is less consistent, with several randomized controlled trials favoring continuous terbinafine, particularly in dermatophyte toenail onychomycosis. Fluconazole administered in weekly regimens appears to be less effective than terbinafine- or itraconazole-based regimens and is generally considered a second-line option. From a safety perspective, pulse and continuous regimens demonstrate safety profiles comparable to those of continuous therapy, with gastrointestinal adverse effects being the most frequently reported events.

conclusionThe current evidence supports continuous terbinafine as the preferred first-line systemic treatment for dermatophyte onychomycosis, whereas pulse itraconazole remains an important alternative for patients who are unable to tolerate terbinafine, have contraindications to its use, or have failed previous therapy. Further well-designed randomized studies with standardized outcome measures and long-term assessment of recurrence are required to better define the optimal role of pulse antifungal therapy in onychomycosis management.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsOnychomycosisHumansItraconazolePulse Therapy, DrugTerbinafineAntifungal AgentsItraconazoleTerbinafineAntifungal agentsDrug safetyItraconazoleOnychomycosisPulse therapyTerbinafine

Identifiers

PMID42786249
PMCPMC13612691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.