Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2003, p. 5209-5211, Vol. 41, No. 11
0095-1137/03/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.11.5209-5211.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Unitat de Microbiologia, Facultat de Medicina i Ciències de la Salut, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, 43201 Reus, Spain
Received 21 May 2003/ Returned for modification 4 July 2003/ Accepted 20 August 2003
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
-demethylase (19). This antifungal agent has shown excellent in vivo and in vitro activity against dermatophytes in the studies performed so far (5; J. M. Torres-Rodriguez, A. Carrillo, C. Gallach, N. Madrenys, and J. Julve, abstract from the 10th Congr. Int. Soc. Hum. Anim. Mycol., Rev. Iberoam. Micol. 5(Suppl. 1):84, 1988). However, its in vitro activity against an important number of strains representing the wide spectrum of dermatophytes, and following a standardized and reproducible method, has not yet been investigated. Even though a reference method for testing dermatophytes has still not been developed, some experience has been accumulated by different authors. Several studies have been performed, generally consisting of modifications of the NCCLS methods for yeasts and molds (8) but also using very different techniques (11, 14). In a recent multicenter study, we determined the optimal conditions for testing of dermatophytes using a microdilution method (7). Therefore, the aim of this study has been to evaluate the in vitro activity of EBZ in comparison with that of the conventional topical drugs CTZ, MCZ, and KTZ against 200 strains of dermatophytes using our own previously standardized method (7). A total of 200 strains of dermatophytes belonging to 19 species were tested. They included 8 Epidermophyton floccosum strains, 5 Microsporum audouinii strains, 23 Microsporum canis strains, 3 Microsporum ferrugineum strains, 2 Microsporum fulvum strains, 1 Microsporum gallinae strain, 10 Microsporum gypseum strains, 1 Microsporum praecox strains, 1 Microsporum racemosum strain, 2 Trichophyton ajelloi strains, 2 Trichophyton balcaneum strains, 7 Trichophyton erinacei strains, 13 Trichophyton interdigitale strains, 31 Trichophyton mentagrophytes strains, 1 Trichophyton phaseoliforme strain, 65 Trichophyton rubrum strains, 2 Trichophyton simii strains, 15 Trichophyton tonsurans strains, and 8 Trichophyton violaceum strains. The isolates were stored as suspensions in water at room temperature until used in the study. Prior to testing, each isolate was subcultured onto potato dextrose agar (PDA) to ensure purity and optimal growth. Aspergillus fumigatus NCPF 7099 was included as a reference strain and was tested each time a set of isolates was evaluated. CTZ was provided by Química Farmaceútica Bayer (Barcelona, Spain), EBZ by Laboratorios Salvat, S. A. (Barcelona, Spain), and MCZ and KTZ by Janssen Research Foundation (Beerse, Belgium). Drug dilutions were prepared in 100% dimethyl sulfoxide at 100 times the final concentration, followed by further dilutions (1:50) in RPMI 1640 medium to yield twice the final strength required for the test. Aliquots (0.1 ml) of each antifungal agent were dispensed into the wells of microdilution trays, which were stored at -70°C until they were used. The final concentrations of all drugs ranged from 0.01 to 16 µg/ml. Stock inoculum suspensions were prepared from 7- to 10-day-old cultures grown on PDA at 28°C as described previously. The suspensions were adjusted to an optical density that ranged from 0.13 to 0.17 (65 to 70% transmittance). The final concentrations of the stock inoculum suspensions ranged from 0.3 x 105 to 6.4 x 106 CFU/ml, as demonstrated by quantitative colony counts on PDA. Each suspension was diluted 1:50 in RPMI 1640 to obtain the final test inoculum twice. Each microdilution well was inoculated with 100 µl of the diluted suspensions. Growth and sterility control wells were included for each isolate tested. The microplates were incubated at 28°C and read at 7 days of incubation. For all drugs, the MIC was defined as the lowest concentration showing 100% growth inhibition. Geometric mean MICs were determined to facilitate comparisons of the activities of the drugs. MIC ranges and the MICs at which 50% and 90% (MIC90) of the isolates are inhibited were also calculated for all species tested. Comparisons of the geometric mean MICs were calculated by Student's t test. P values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Table 1 summarizes the in vitro susceptibility of the four drugs tested. The MIC ranges of CTZ, MCZ, and KTZ were broader in all cases (0.01 to
16 µg/ml) than those of EBZ (0.03 to 2 µg/ml). In general, all drugs showed good activity, although EBZ displayed the lowest geometric mean MIC (0.11 µg/ml) of the four drugs tested (P < 0.05). Those of CTZ, MCZ, and KTZ were 0.22, 0.43, and 0.72 µg/ml, respectively. KTZ and MCZ showed the highest MIC90 (2 µg/ml). EBZ (considering only the species with eight or more strains included in the study) was the most active against E. floccosum (mean MIC, 0.06 µg/ml), M. canis (mean MIC, 0.11 µg/ml), M. gypseum (mean MIC, 0.07 µg/ml), T. mentagrophytes (mean MIC, 0.14 µg/ml), T. rubrum (mean MIC, 0.12 µg/ml), and T. tonsurans (mean MIC, 0.09 µg/ml) (P < 0.05). The differences between the MICs of CTZ and EBZ were not statistically significant for T. interdigitale (0.27 and 0.26 µg/ml, respectively) and T. violaceum (0.09 and 0.07 µg/ml, respectively).
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. In vitro activity of four topical antifungal agents against 19 species of dermatophytes determined by the microdilution broth method
|
As mentioned above, KTZ, CTZ, and MCZ are currently the most used in the topical treatment of dermatomycoses (2, 17). In recent years, there has been an important increase in the use of topical agents, probably due to the fact that they produce fewer adverse effects than systemic therapy. They are also commonly used in the prevention of recurrence of onychomycosis and tinea pedis (1, 10). In our country, KTZ is clearly the topical antifungal agent most used (27%), followed by CTZ (17%) and MCZ (17%) (2). EBZ is a novel antifungal agent which has potential against human mucosal and cutaneous mycoses (15). Another interesting feature of this drug is its anti-inflammatory activity (9). Preliminary in vitro data have indicated that this drug is also active against some triazole-resistant yeasts, such as Candida glabrata and Candida krusei and even gram-positive bacteria (4, 19).
In our study, EBZ and CTZ showed the lowest MICs against all of the strains tested. In vivo efficacy of both drugs has also been investigated in clinical trials with patients with tinea. In a double-blind phase III study of dermatophytoses that included 133 patients, del Palacio et al. (4) compared the efficacy of EBZ 1% cream with that of CTZ 1% cream. Both antifungals showed similar results. EBZ was effective in 72% of treated sites, whereas CTZ effective was in 61% of them. The relapse rate in both groups was 1% for the EBZ group and 4% for the CTZ group.
In our study the other two antifungals tested, KTZ and MCZ, also showed low MICs. Other authors have also obtained low MICs testing these drugs, although these results are difficult to compare because they have used different techniques (11, 14).
Although terbinafine has been shown to be at least as effective as MCZ and CTZ in tinea pedis (12, 16) or KTZ in tinea corporis (3) when it is administered topically, it was not included in our study because it is used mainly systematically to treat onychomycoses. In addition, in a previous article (6) members of our group had already reported the in vitro activity of this compound against an important number of dermatophyte strains.
In summary, ECZ was more active in vitro against a broad range of species of dermatophytes than the other topical drugs tested. Therefore, this antifungal agent may be a good alternative for the treatment of dermatophytoses that require a topical therapy.
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»