This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ASM journals
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Howarth, W. R.
Right arrow Articles by Solotorovsky, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Howarth, W. R.
Right arrow Articles by Solotorovsky, M.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1975 January; 7(1): 58-63
Copyright © 1975 American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Comparative In Vitro Antifungal Activity of Amphotericin B and Amphotericin B Methyl Ester

William R. Howarth, Ram P. Tewari and Morris Solotorovsky

Department of Microbiology and Bureau of Biological Research, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903

ABSTRACT

The in vitro antifungal activity of amphotericin B methyl ester (AME), a water-soluble derivative of amphotericin B, was compared to that of the parent compound against a variety of pathogenic and potentially pathogenic fungi. AME has a significant antifungal activity, but the activity of AME was slightly lower than that of amphotericin B. Among the yeast-like organisms, only the yeast cells of Sporothrix schenckii were more resistant than others to both antibiotics, with a minimal fungicidal concentration of 5 to 10 µg/ml. The yeast cells of other fungi were killed at concentrations of 1 µg or less of either antibiotic per ml. The filamentous forms of S. schenckii and Oidiodendron kalrai were more resistant than the filamentous forms of other dimorphic fungi to both drugs. The minimal fungicidal concentration for S. schenckii was 10 µg/ml and for O. kalrai, 50 µg/ml. The dermatophytes, phycomycetes, and dematacious and other potentially pathogenic fungi were inhibited fairly well by both drugs, but up to 50 µg/ml was required for fungicidal action. The water solubility and wide spectrum of antifungal activity of AME warrant evaluation of its chemotherapeutic activity against experimental fungal infections.

Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1975 January; 7(1): 58-63
Copyright © 1975 American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:

  • LEHRER, R. I., HOWARD, D. H., SYPHERD, P. S., EDWARDS, J. E., SEGAL, G. P., WINSTON, D. J. (1980). Mucormycosis. ANN INTERN MED 93: 93-108 [Abstract]  
  • EDWARDS, J. E. Jr., LEHRER, R. I., STIEHM, E. R., FISCHER, T. J., YOUNG, L. S. (1978). Severe Candidal Infections: Clinical Perspective, Immune Defense Mechanisms, and Current Concepts of Therapy. ANN INTERN MED 89: 91-106 [Abstract]  


Copyright © 2010 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»