Previous Article | Next Article 
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, May 1998, p. 1057-1061, Vol. 42, No. 5
0066-4804/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
In Vitro Activities of Terbinafine against
Cutaneous Isolates of Candida albicans and Other
Pathogenic Yeasts
Neil S.
Ryder,*
Sonja
Wagner, and
Ingrid
Leitner
Novartis Research Institute, A-1235 Vienna,
Austria
Received 22 January 1998/Returned for modification 17 February
1998/Accepted 9 March 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
Terbinafine is active in vitro against a wide range of pathogenic
fungi, including dermatophytes, molds, dimorphic fungi, and some
yeasts, but earlier studies indicated that the drug had little activity
against Candida albicans. In contrast, clinical studies
have shown topical and oral terbinafine to be active in cutaneous
candidiasis and Candida nail infections. In order to define
the anti-Candida activity of terbinafine, we tested the drug against 350 fresh clinical isolates and additional strains by
using a broth dilution assay standardized according to the guidelines
of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS)
M27-A assay. Terbinafine was found to have an MIC of 1 µg/ml for
reference C. albicans strains. For 259 clinical isolates, the MIC at which 50% of the isolates are inhibited (MIC50)
of terbinafine was 1 µg/ml (fluconazole, 0.5 µg/ml), and the
MIC90 was 4 µg/ml (fluconazole, 1 µg/ml). Terbinafine
was highly active against Candida parapsilosis
(MIC90, 0.125 µg/ml) and showed potentially interesting
activity against isolates of Candida dubliniensis, Candida guilliermondii, Candida humicola, and
Candida lusitaniae. It was not active against the
Candida glabrata, Candida krusei, and
Candida tropicalis isolates in this assay.
Cryptococcus laurentii and Cryptococcus
neoformans were highly susceptible to terbinafine, with MICs of
0.06 to 0.25 µg/ml. The NCCLS macrodilution assay provides
reproducible in vitro data for terbinafine against Candida and other yeasts. The MICs for C. albicans and C. parapsilosis are compatible with the known clinical efficacy of
terbinafine in cutaneous infections, while the clinical relevance of
its activities against the other species has yet to be determined.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The allylamine antimycotic
terbinafine is employed both orally and topically in the therapy of
fungal infections of the skin, nails, and hair. Numerous earlier
reports have documented the activity of terbinafine against a wide
range of pathogenic fungi in vitro, as reviewed previously (2, 25,
26). The mechanism of action of terbinafine involves the specific
inhibition of fungal squalene epoxidase, resulting in ergosterol
deficiency and accumulation of intracellular squalene, and appears to
be identical in dermatophytes, molds, and yeasts (23).
Terbinafine has extremely potent in vitro activity against
dermatophytes (25), correlating well with its established
clinical efficacy against these organisms (4). In the case
of dermatophytes and a number of other filamentous fungi, in vitro
testing of terbinafine has proved to be fairly straightforward, and
consistent results have been reported by investigators using a variety
of methods (25). This situation probably reflects the
primary fungicidal action of terbinafine against these organisms
(3, 19), which results in clear zero-growth end points in
conventional determinations of MICs. In contrast, widely varying MICs
have been reported for Candida species, and terbinafine has
generally been considered to have little or no activity against
Candida albicans yeasts in vitro, although the filamentous
form is susceptible (31). The activity of the drug against
C. albicans is primarily fungistatic (19).
Despite the unpromising in vitro data, terbinafine has proven clinical
efficacy against cutaneous candidiasis with either topical or oral
therapy, (8-10, 34, 37) and against Candida nail
infections (17, 32). There is thus a discrepancy between clinical efficacy and apparent poor in vitro activity against the
responsible pathogen. Earlier tests were performed with a variety of
different assay media and conditions which delivered correspondingly
varied results, and similar problems of compatibility with clinical
data were encountered with other drugs, such as fluconazole. More
recently, the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards
(NCCLS) has established guidelines for standardized susceptibility
testing of yeasts with azoles, amphotericin B, and flucytosine in the
form of the M27-A broth dilution assay (16). In order to
clarify the question of the in vitro activity of terbinafine, we have
investigated the applicability of the M27 assay to testing this drug
against Candida and other yeasts. We report here the
activity of terbinafine against six reference strains of
Candida in comparison with standard drugs and the results of
testing over 350 clinical isolates and other strains in comparison with
fluconazole.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Fungal isolates.
Fresh isolates of C. albicans
and other yeasts were obtained directly from clinical centers
performing trials of topical formulations of terbinafine against
cutaneous candidiasis. The countries of origin included the United
States, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Panama.
Isolates were plated onto Sabouraud dextrose agar, and cultures were
established from a single colony. The identification of the cultures
was confirmed by using the API 20C kit (Biomerieux, Marcy l'Etoile,
France) according to the maker's instructions. In addition, the
species-selective chromogenic media CHROMagar (Chromagar Company,
Paris, France) and Albicans ID Agar (Biomerieux) were used, as well as
routine morphological examination. In certain cases, the identity of
C. albicans isolates was additionally confirmed by
observation of chlamydospore formation on rice agar. Cultures were
grown up in liquid shake culture (Sabouraud dextrose broth, pH 6.5) for
30 h at 30°C and then stored at
80°C as cell suspensions in
ampoules with 5% (vol/vol) dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) as cryoprotectant
before testing. Reference strains (for validation of the assay) and
additional test strains were purchased from the American Type Culture
Collection, Rockville, Md. (ATCC numbers), and the Centraalbureau voor
Schimmelcultures, Baarn, The Netherlands (CBS numbers), or were from
the Novartis collection (NFI numbers).
Antifungal drugs.
Terbinafine, itraconazole, and
ketoconazole were synthesized at Novartis. Fluconazole was extracted
from commercial tablets of Diflucan (Pfizer). Terbinafine was used as
the standard hydrochloride salt (weight correction factor, 1.12 with
respect to the pure base), while the azoles were analytically pure.
Amphotericin B, formulated as Fungizone (weight correction factor,
1.82), was purchased from Bristol-Myers Squibb GmbH, Munich, Germany.
5-Flucytosine (5FC) was obtained from Sigma Chemical Corp. (catalog
#F-7129).
Assay medium.
Assays were performed in RPMI 1640 medium
without NaHCO3 but with L-glutamine (GIBCO BRL,
Paisley, Scotland) buffered with 0.165 M
3-[N-morpholino]propanesulfonic acid (MOPS) (Sigma
M-8899). The medium was adjusted to be at pH 7.0 at 35°C, sterile
filtered, aliquoted into 160- by 16-mm glass tubes (1.8 ml/tube), and
stored at 4°C until used.
Antifungal testing in vitro.
MICs were determined in broth
macrodilution assays according to a modification of the NCCLS M27-A
protocol (16). Terbinafine was first dissolved at 100-fold
highest final concentration in DMSO containing 5% Tween 80, after
which sequential twofold dilutions were made in DMSO followed by
fivefold dilutions of each solution in RPMI medium. Dilution procedures
for the other drugs were as described for the reference method
(16). Inocula for assays were prepared from stocks frozen at
80°C by dilution in growth medium to give a final viable cell count
of 2.5 × 103 CFU/ml. Each assay was performed with a
duplicate series of drug dilutions. Drug solution (0.1 ml) and fungal
inoculum (0.1 ml) were added to each tube prefilled with 1.8 ml of
medium to give a total volume of 2 ml. Tubes were capped with
loose-fitting stainless-steel caps, vortexed, and then incubated for
48 h (72 h for Cryptococcus) at 35°C in air. Two end
points were recorded: the MIC of amphotericin B was defined as the
lowest drug concentration causing 100% inhibition of fungal growth,
while those of terbinafine, fluconazole, and other drugs were defined
as the lowest drug concentrations causing at least 80% inhibition. A
solvent control was included in each set of assays; the DMSO diluent at
maximum final concentration of 1% had no effect on fungal growth. Each
set of assays was validated by testing the reference strain ATCC 24433 in parallel and ensuring that the MIC of the standard drug fluconazole
was within the NCCLS-recommended range.
Statistical analysis.
Primary data were stored in Excel 5.0 tables for statistical analysis. For subsequent calculations, MICs of
>128 were set to the next higher value of 256. The MICs were then
converted to their log (base 2) for calculation of geometric means, and comparisons between test drugs were made by using the Student t test (two-tailed) with paired data.
 |
RESULTS |
Application of the NCCLS assay to terbinafine.
The
macrodilution assay described above was initially validated with
standard drugs by using the NCCLS-recommended reference strains of
Candida, after which terbinafine was also tested against these strains (Table 1). Values obtained
with the standard drugs were in agreement with the recommended ranges
(16). Using 80% inhibition of growth as the assay end
point, clear and reproducible MICs were obtained of terbinafine for the
C. albicans and C. parapsilosis strains, while
the C. krusei and C. tropicalis strains appeared to be resistant in this assay (Table 1). Using complete growth inhibition as the end point, MICs could be obtained only for C. parapsilosis, consistent with the previously established
fungicidal action of terbinafine against this species. Neither
terbinafine nor fluconazole achieved complete growth inhibition of the
other Candida species, consistent with a fungistatic action.
The results obtained were highly reproducible between experiments.
Using C. albicans ATCC 24433 as a reference in a series of
over 60 separate sets of assays performed during an 18-month period,
consistent results were obtained with MICs of terbinafine of 1 or 2 µg/ml and of fluconazole of 0.5 µg/ml.
Since our method of inoculation of the assays (using stocks maintained
at
80°C) differed from that of the NCCLS reference standard (which
uses freshly grown cells), a direct comparison was made of the two
inocula using the six reference Candida strains shown in
Table 1. At equivalent viable cell counts, use of fresh or frozen
inocula had no effect on the MICs of terbinafine, fluconazole, and
amphotericin B, the values obtained being identical to those given in
Table 1. In C. albicans, a 10-fold variation in the viable
cell count (from 0.5 × 103 to 5 × 103 CFU/ml) did cause minor variation in the MICs of
terbinafine and fluconazole with both fresh and frozen inocula, as
expected. The maximum observed variation in MIC was two dilution steps, and no MIC with either fresh or frozen inocula varied by more than one
dilution step from the values in Table 1. A fixed inoculum of 2.5 × 103 CFU/ml was used in all other assays reported here.
Activity of terbinafine against cutaneous C. albicans
isolates.
Having established the reproducibility of the NCCLS
assay with terbinafine, we used this method to test susceptibility of fresh Candida isolates obtained during clinical trials of
topical terbinafine formulations in cutaneous candidiasis. As expected, C. albicans was the predominant species isolated.
Fluconazole was chosen as comparator drug as there are extensive data
available on the use of the NCCLS assay with this drug and its
relationship to clinical efficacy. Terbinafine and fluconazole both had
MICs over the full test range of 0.03 to >128 µg/ml for 259 C. albicans isolates, with geometric mean values of 1.4 and 0.6 µg/ml, respectively (Table 2). However,
analysis of the data (Table 3)
demonstrates that over 90% of MICs of both drugs were within a much
narrower range of 0.25 to 4 µg/ml. For each drug, there was a small
subpopulation of isolates which displayed higher MICs. In the case of
fluconazole, 242 of 259 isolates had MICs of 4 µg/ml or lower, while
the remaining 17 isolates had MICs of 128 µg/ml or higher. These
groups of isolates are classified respectively as susceptible and fully
resistant according to the NCCLS resistance breakpoints of
8 and >64
µg/ml (16). Clinically relevant breakpoints are currently
not available for terbinafine, but a distinct group of 16 isolates with
higher MICs (>8 µg/ml) was also observed (Table 3). By the same
criteria, six isolates (about 2% of the total) were found to be
resistant to both drugs.
Activity of terbinafine against other yeasts.
Testing of the
non-C. albicans clinical isolates (Table 2) confirmed the
potent activity of terbinafine against Candida parapsilosis, with a MIC at which 90% of the isolates are inhibited
(MIC90) of 0.125 µg/ml. In contrast to the other species
tested, 100% growth inhibition end points were also attained in
C. parapsilosis by using terbinafine, with a
MIC50 of 4 µg/ml and a range of 0.5 to >128 µg/ml
(n = 11). In order to gain a more complete picture of
the spectrum of terbinafine, additional isolates for testing were
obtained from culture collections, as listed in Table 2. Terbinafine
had potentially interesting activity against isolates of several other
Candida species, including Candida
guilliermondii, Candida dubliniensis, Candida
humicola, and Candida lusitaniae but showed no activity
in this assay against Candida glabrata, Candida
krusei, and Candida tropicalis. Terbinafine was highly active against both Cryptococcus species tested and
significantly superior to fluconazole. It was also effective against
some isolates of Blastoschizomyces capitatus and
Trichosporon beigelii.
 |
DISCUSSION |
The NCCLS macrodilution assay appears to be suitable for testing
terbinafine against Candida species. Because of the
lipophilic nature of the drug, particular care is required in
preparation of the sequential dilutions; the procedure described here
provided clear drug solutions and consistent results. The MIC data for the standard fluconazole agreed well with published data, and results
were highly reproducible, thus providing a basis for comprehensive testing of terbinafine against a wider range of isolates.
Interestingly, the MICs of terbinafine against C. albicans
were much lower than those obtained by earlier investigators (19,
26), who reported MIC50s of around 25 µg/ml
compared with 1 µg/ml in the present study. This is likely due to two
characteristics of the NCCLS method. First, the readout is 80% growth
inhibition, eliminating the uncertainty of trailing end points seen in
Candida treated with dilution series of azoles or
allylamines. Second, the NCCLS medium is buffered at neutral pH, while
earlier methods used unbuffered media which are rapidly acidified by
Candida species. Terbinafine is much less active at low pH
(22), so that inclusion of a neutral buffer is an essential
prerequisite for testing this and related drugs against yeasts.
However, the new results confirm the potent activity of terbinafine
against C. parapsilosis which had previously been noted by
other investigators (19, 26).
The data for C. albicans provide an opportunity for analysis
of antifungal resistance in "normal" isolates, which are unlikely to have had extensive previous exposure to the drugs, since AIDS or
other immunocompromised patients were excluded from the clinical studies. As seen in Table 3, MICs of fluconazole formed two discrete clusters of susceptible (<8 µg/ml) or resistant (
64 µg/ml)
isolates, in accordance with NCCLS breakpoints (16), with no
intermediate values. Although clinically relevant breakpoints are not
available for terbinafine, a similar pattern is seen taking 8 µg/ml
as a breakpoint for in vitro resistance. The two clusters of 17 fluconazole-resistant isolates and 16 terbinafine-resistant isolates
partially overlap to give a group of six isolates resistant to both
drugs. The nonoverlapping isolates show no correlation of MICs between
the two drugs. Thus, at least two resistance mechanisms must be
involved, specific for fluconazole and terbinafine, respectively, with
the possibility of a third mechanism conferring resistance to both
drugs. A number of mechanisms of azole resistance have been described,
the most important apparently being mediated by multidrug resistance
efflux transporters (1). Recently, Sanglard et al. have
identified genes for several such transporters in C. albicans and shown that they could confer resistance to
fluconazole, other azoles, and a variety of other compounds (27,
28). Three of these genes, CDR1, CDR2, and
BENr, also conferred resistance to terbinafine,
thus providing a potential mechanism for the partial
fluconazole-terbinafine cross-resistance which we observed. However,
since both terbinafine and azoles act on stages of the ergosterol
biosynthesis pathway, other mechanisms may also be involved, and
further studies are required to settle this question. Acquired
resistance to terbinafine has never been reported, but the drug has
been little used against Candida infections. Differential
constitutive expression of multidrug resistance transporters may also
explain the considerable variation in susceptibility of different
Candida species to terbinafine as well as to fluconazole. The target enzyme of terbinafine, squalene epoxidase, was previously shown to differ in sensitivity to the drug by at most a factor of 10 between C. albicans, C. parapsilosis, and
C. glabrata (22, 24), which does not explain the
>1,000-fold differences in MICs for these species. Fluconazole is also
inherently inactive against C. krusei (20) and
frequently displays high MICs against C. glabrata and
C. tropicalis (12, 21) as seen in the present study. Low intracellular accumulation of the drug has previously been
implicated in the resistance of C. krusei to fluconazole (13). The critical role of efflux transporters in
determining drug susceptibility in fungi as well as other pathogens has
only recently become apparent (11), and additional studies
are clearly needed to elucidate the mechanisms involved with respect to
terbinafine and other commonly used antifungals.
C. albicans is the predominant causative agent of
candidiasis of either the skin or mucosal surfaces (18).
However, C. parapsilosis was found to be the most
frequently isolated yeast in the subungual space of the hand in healthy
subjects (14) and has been associated with around 50% of
Candida nail infections and mixed yeast-dermatophyte infections (17, 36). C. parapsilosis is also
regarded as an important emerging nosocomial pathogen (6,
36). The in vitro activity of terbinafine against these two
organisms is thus of interest with regard to potential clinical
efficacy. Topically applied terbinafine was found to be highly
effective in cutaneous candidiasis (8, 10, 37), but the high
drug levels attained with topical therapy may render differences in MIC
irrelevant. Oral terbinafine has also been reported to show efficacy in
cutaneous candidiasis (9, 34) and in Candida nail
infections (17, 32). After oral administration (250 mg/day),
terbinafine attains peak levels of up to 12 µg/g in the stratum
corneum (5), which is well above the MIC for most C. albicans isolates. In nails, peak levels are around 0.5 to 1.5 µg/g (5, 30), which covers the MIC of only 50% of
C. albicans isolates but all of C. parapsilosis. Interestingly, in both of the studies cited above, nail infections due
to C. parapsilosis responded significantly better than those involving C. albicans. This difference is presumably a
reflection of the greater in vitro susceptibility of C. parapsilosis to terbinafine, as found in the present study.
The mean MICs obtained of terbinafine against clinical isolates of
C. albicans (Table 2) were similar to those found by using the laboratory reference strains (Table 1), although the clinical isolates showed a broader range of values (Table 3). However, the
results obtained with these cutaneous isolates are not necessarily predictive for isolates from other sites of infection, such as mucosal
or systemic candidiasis. Oral terbinafine (250 mg/day) was not
effective in a pilot study against AIDS-associated oral candidiasis
(15), but it is not yet known whether this lack of efficacy
is due to pharmacokinetic factors or to low susceptibility of the
pathogens. On the other hand, a systemic Candida infection was reported to respond to treatment with higher doses of terbinafine (35).
Regarding the remaining Candida species tested, too little
clinical experience is available to draw any conclusions with respect to correlation of in vitro and clinical data. The high MICs obtained for C. glabrata and C. tropicalis stand in
contrast to the reported clinical efficacy of terbinafine in a small
number of infections caused by these agents (32, 34). The
significant activities against C. dubliniensis, C. humicola, and C. lusitaniae have not been previously
reported for this drug. Terbinafine was found to be highly active
against Cryptococcus species, confirming earlier reports
using different assay conditions (7, 33), and suggesting that the drug might be clinically useful against these organisms, which
are occasionally involved in skin disease as well as causing serious
systemic infections. Oral terbinafine (250 mg/day) was recently
reported to have cured a cutaneous Cryptococcus lesion which
was resistant to treatment with fluconazole and itraconazole (29). The activities against isolates of T. beigelii, the agent of white piedra, and the opportunistic
pathogen B. capitatus are also potentially of clinical
interest.
In conclusion, the M27 macrodilution assay, which is widely used for
testing of other antimycotics, has also been found to be suitable for
application with terbinafine. For routine testing, a 96-well
microdilution assay would be more convenient, and we are attempting to
optimize this technique for agreement with the macro method when
testing with terbinafine. By using the NCCLS assay, we obtained highly
reproducible MICs for terbinafine, which were compatible with the known
clinical efficacy of the drug against cutaneous Candida
infections. Furthermore, the data indicated that terbinafine is active
against a range of other pathogenic yeasts and may therefore have
clinical applications against some of these organisms.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Novartis
Research Institute, Brunner Strasse 59, A-1235 Vienna, Austria. Phone:
(431) 86634-324. Fax: (431) 86634-354. E-mail:
neil.ryder{at}pharma.novartis.com.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Alexander, B. D., and J. R. Perfect.
1997.
Antifungal resistance trends towards the year 2000 implications for therapy and new approaches.
Drugs
54:657-678[Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Balfour, J. A., and D. Faulds.
1992.
Terbinafine: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential in superficial mycoses.
Drugs
43:259-284[Medline].
|
| 3.
| Clayton, Y. M. 1994. Relevance of
broad-spectrum and fungicidal activity of antifungals in the treatment
of dermatomycoses. Br. J. Dermatol. 130(Suppl.
43.):7-8.
|
| 4.
|
Evans, E. G. V.
1997.
The clinical efficacy of terbinafine in the treatment of fungal infections of the skin.
Rev. Contemp. Pharmacother.
8:325-341.
|
| 5.
|
Faergemann, J.,
H. Zehender,
J. Denouel, and L. Millerioux.
1993.
Levels of terbinafine in plasma, stratum-corneum, dermis-epidermis (without stratum-corneum), sebum, hair and nails during and after 250 mg terbinafine orally once per day for 4 weeks.
Acta Dermato-Venereol.
73:305-309[Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Girmenia, C.,
P. Martino,
F. De Bernardis,
G. Gentile,
M. Boccanera,
M. Monaco,
G. Antonucci, and A. Cassone.
1996.
Rising incidence of Candida parapsilosis fungemia in patients with hematologic malignancies: clinical aspects, predisposing factors, and differential pathogenicity of the causative strains.
Clin. Infect. Dis.
23:506-514[Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Hiratani, T.,
Y. Asagi, and H. Yamaguchi.
1991.
Evaluation of in vitro antimycotic activity of terbinafine, a new allylamine agent.
Jpn. J. Med. Mycol.
32:323-332.
|
| 8.
| Jones, T. C. 1990. Treatment of
dermatomycoses with topically applied allylamines: naftifine and
terbinafine. J. Dermatol. Treat. 1(Suppl.
2):29-32.
|
| 9.
|
Jung, E. G.,
P. J. Haas,
M. Brautigam, and G. Weidinger.
1994.
Systemic treatment of skin candidosis: a randomized comparison of terbinafine and ketoconazole.
Mycoses
37:361-365[Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Kagawa, S.
1989.
Clinical efficacy of terbinafine in 629 Japanese patients with dermatomycosis.
Clin. Exp. Dermatol.
14:114-115[Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Kolaczkowski, M., and A. Goffeau.
1997.
Active efflux by multidrug transporters as one of the strategies to evade chemotherapy and novel practical implications of yeast pleiotropic drug resistance.
Pharmacol. Ther.
76:219-242[Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Law, D.,
C. B. Moore,
L. A. Joseph,
M. G. L. Keaney, and D. W. Denning.
1996.
High incidence of antifungal drug resistance in Candida tropicalis.
Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents
7:241-245[Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Marichal, P.,
J. Gorrens,
M. C. Coene,
L. Le Jeune, and H. Vanden Bossche.
1995.
Origin of differences in susceptibility of Candida krusei to azole antifungal agents.
Mycoses
38:111-117[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
McGinley, K. J.,
E. L. Larson, and J. J. Leyden.
1988.
Composition and density of microflora in the subungual space of the hand.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
26:950-953[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
| Nandwani, R., A. Parnell, M. Youle, C. J. N. Lacey, E. G. V. Evans, J. Midgley, J. Cartledge, and
D. A. Hawkins. 1996. Use of terbinafine in HIV-positive
subjects: pilot studies in onychomycosis and oral candidiasis. Br.
J. Dermatol. 134(Suppl. 46):22-24.
|
| 16.
|
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.
1997.
Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. Approved standard. NCCLS document M27-A.
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Wayne, Pa.
|
| 17.
| Nolting, S., M. Brautigam, and G. Weidinger. 1994. Terbinafine in onychomycosis with involvement by non-dermatophytic
fungi. Br. J. Dermatol. 130(Suppl.
43):16-21.
|
| 18.
| Odds, F. C. 1994. Pathogenesis of
Candida infections. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.
31(Suppl.):S2-S5.
|
| 19.
|
Petranyi, G.,
J. G. Meingassner, and H. Mieth.
1987.
Antifungal activity of the allylamine derivative terbinafine in vitro.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
31:1365-1368[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Rex, J. H.,
M. A. Pfaller,
J. N. Galgiani,
M. S. Bartlett,
A. Espinel-Ingroff,
M. A. Ghannoum,
M. Lancaster,
F. C. Odds,
M. G. Rinaldi,
T. J. Walsh, and A. L. Barry.
1997.
Development of interpretive breakpoints for antifungal susceptibility testing: conceptual framework and analysis of in vitro in vivo correlation data for fluconazole, itraconazole, and Candida infections.
Clin. Infect. Dis.
24:235-247[Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Rex, J. H.,
M. G. Rinaldi, and M. A. Pfaller.
1995.
Resistance of Candida species to fluconazole.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
39:1-8[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Ryder, N. S.
1985.
Specific inhibition of fungal sterol biosynthesis by SF 86-327, a new allylamine antimycotic agent.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
27:252-256[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
| Ryder, N. S. 1992. Terbinafine: mode of action
and properties of the squalene epoxidase inhibition. Br. J. Dermatol. 126(Suppl. 39):2-7.
|
| 24.
|
Ryder, N. S., and M.-C. Dupont.
1985.
Inhibition of squalene epoxidase by allylamine antimycotic compounds: a comparative study of the fungal and mammalian enzymes.
Biochem. J.
230:765-770[Medline].
|
| 25.
|
Ryder, N. S., and B. Favre.
1997.
Antifungal activity and mechanism of action of terbinafine.
Rev. Contemp. Pharmacother.
8:275-287.
|
| 26.
|
Ryder, N. S., and H. Mieth.
1992.
Allylamine antifungal drugs.
Curr. Top. Med. Mycol.
4:158-188[Medline].
|
| 27.
|
Sanglard, D.,
F. Ischer,
M. Monod, and J. Bille.
1996.
Susceptibilities of Candida albicans multidrug transporter mutants to various antifungal agents and other metabolic inhibitors.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
40:2300-2305[Abstract].
|
| 28.
|
Sanglard, D.,
F. Ischer,
M. Monod, and J. Bille.
1997.
Cloning of Candida albicans genes conferring resistance to azole antifungal agents: characterization of CDR2, a new multidrug ABC transporter gene.
Microbiology
143:405-416[Abstract].
|
| 29.
| Sanz-Asenjo, A., J. A. Heras-Tabernero, S. Vidal-Asensi, and C. Arjona-Manuel. 1997. Healing of a multidrug
resistant cutaneous cryptococcosis with oral terbinafine. Australas. J. Dermatol. 38(Suppl. 2):120.
|
| 30.
|
Schatz, F.,
M. Brautigam,
E. Dobrowolski,
I. Effendy,
H. Haberl,
H. Mensing,
G. Weidinger, and A. Stuetz.
1995.
Nail incorporation kinetics of terbinafine in onychomycosis patients.
Clin. Exp. Dermatol.
20:377-383[Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Schaude, M.,
H. Ackerbauer, and H. Mieth.
1987.
Inhibitory effect of antifungal agents on germ tube formation in Candida albicans.
Mykosen
30:281-287[Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Segal, R.,
A. Kritzman,
L. Cividalli,
Z. Samra, and M. David.
1996.
Treatment of Candida nail infection with terbinafine.
J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.
35:958-961[Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Shadomy, S.,
A. Espinell-Ingroff, and R. J. Gebhart.
1985.
In vitro studies with SF 86-327, a new orally active allylamine derivative.
Sabouraudia
23:125-132[Medline].
|
| 34.
| Villars, V., and T. C. Jones. 1990. Present
status of the efficacy and tolerability of terbinafine (Lamisil) used
systemically in the treatment of dermatomycoses of skin and nails. J. Dermatol. Treat. 1(Suppl. 2):33-38.
|
| 35.
| Villars, V. V., and T. C. Jones. 1992. Special features of the clinical use of oral terbinafine in the
treatment of fungal diseases. Br. J. Dermatol.
129(Suppl. 39):61-69.
|
| 36.
|
Weems, J. J.
1992.
Candida parapsilosis: epidemiology, pathogenicity, clinical manifestations, and antimicrobial susceptibility.
Clin. Infect. Dis.
14:756-766[Medline].
|
| 37.
| Zaias, N. 1997. Candida: a review of
clinical experience with Lamisil(R). Dermatology 194(Suppl.
1):10-13.
|
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, May 1998, p. 1057-1061, Vol. 42, No. 5
0066-4804/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Graminha, M. A. S., Rocha, E. M. F., Prade, R. A., Martinez-Rossi, N. M.
(2004). Terbinafine Resistance Mediated by Salicylate 1-Monooxygenase in Aspergillus nidulans. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
48: 3530-3535
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Smith, W. L., Edlind, T. D.
(2002). Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors Enhance Candida albicans Sensitivity to Azoles and Related Antifungals: Correlation with Reduction in CDR and ERG Upregulation. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
46: 3532-3539
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Perea, S., Gonzalez, G., Fothergill, A. W., Sutton, D. A., Rinaldi, M. G.
(2002). In Vitro Activities of Terbinafine in Combination with Fluconazole, Itraconazole, Voriconazole, and Posaconazole against Clinical Isolates of Candida glabrata with Decreased Susceptibility to Azoles. J. Clin. Microbiol.
40: 1831-1833
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Rex, J. H., Pfaller, M. A., Walsh, T. J., Chaturvedi, V., Espinel-Ingroff, A., Ghannoum, M. A., Gosey, L. L., Odds, F. C., Rinaldi, M. G., Sheehan, D. J., Warnock, D. W.
(2001). Antifungal Susceptibility Testing: Practical Aspects and Current Challenges. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
14: 643-658
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Moore, C. B., Walls, C. M., Denning, D. W.
(2001). In Vitro Activities of Terbinafine against Aspergillus Species in Comparison with Those of Itraconazole and Amphotericin B. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
45: 1882-1885
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Sugita, T., Takashima, M., Ikeda, R., Nakase, T., Shinoda, T.
(2000). Intraspecies Diversity of Cryptococcus laurentii as Revealed by Sequences of Internal Transcribed Spacer Regions and 28S rRNA Gene and Taxonomic Position of C. laurentii Clinical Isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol.
38: 1468-1471
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Favre, B., Didmon, M., Ryder, N. S.
(1999). Multiple amino acid substitutions in lanosterol 14{alpha}-demethylase contribute to azole resistance in Candida albicans. Microbiology
145: 2715-2725
[Abstract]
[Full Text]