ReviewMycopathologia2026
Environmental Terbinafine Contamination and Dermatophyte Resistance: A One Health Hypothesis in Need of Ecological Validation.
Review in Mycopathologia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Terbinafine resistance in dermatophytes is an increasing global concern, driven in part by the intercontinental spread of Trichophyton indotineae. The current epidemic of dermatophyte resistance is primarily attributed to clinical and community factors, including inappropriate antifungal use and fixed-dose corticosteroid-antifungal combinations. However, environmental antifungal contamination has emerged as a potential but largely unexplored contributor to resistance selection, as has been proposed for azole resistance in other fungal pathogens. Here, we examine whether environmental terbinafine contamination represents an overlooked One Health selection pressure or, alternatively, an exposure signal whose relevance to dermatophyte resistance remains ecologically constrained. Terbinafine is highly lipophilic, partitions into organic matter, and has been detected in wastewater, sludge, biosolids, surface water, groundwater, and sediment. Reported concentrations vary markedly by region and sample type, and in some cases exceed proposed resistance-selection thresholds. However, most clinically important dermatophytes, particularly anthropophilic Trichophyton lineages, are host-associated keratinophilic fungi rather than free-living environmental saprobes. Therefore, environmental terbinafine is unlikely to drive resistance unless viable dermatophyte propagules, keratinous substrates, and biologically active drug residues co-occur in the same ecological niche. Current evidence is insufficient to determine whether environmental terbinafine contamination contributes meaningfully to dermatophyte resistance selection. While infected wildlife and geophilic dermatophytes may serve as useful sentinel systems, they do not yet establish a causal environmental pathway for the emergence or spread of resistant T. indotineae. In order to address these knowledge gaps, we propose that future One Health surveillance should integrate terbinafine quantification with dermatophyte recovery, resistance-marker detection (i.e., SQLE screening), susceptibility testing, and experimental selection studies in biologically plausible reservoirs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42867584What 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.