4.5 Article

Clinical efficacy and safety of oral terbinafine in fungal mycetoma

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 2, Pages 154-157

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-4632.2004.02392.x

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives An open-label study was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of terbinafine in the treatment of eumycetoma. Methods Single-center, open-label study, including 27 patients with signs and symptoms of eumycetoma which had developed within 5 years and was confirmed by mycological examination. The intention-to-treat population (n = 23) received 500 mg of terbinafine bid for 24-48 weeks. Efficacy evaluations included clinical signs and symptoms (e.g. sinuses open or closed, degree of tumefaction, and emission of grains either present or absent); mycological examinations from Week 24 onwards; and investigators' overall assessment of efficacy (cure, improved since baseline, unchanged since baseline, or deterioration since baseline). Safety evaluations included monitoring of adverse events, laboratory assessments, vital signs and physical examinations. Results Good clinical improvement was seen in patients who completed the study (n = 20). Tumefaction was absent or improved in 80% of patients; sinuses were closed in 50% of patients, and grain emissions were absent in 65% of patients. Of the 16 patients who had repeat mycological assessment, four (25%) were mycologically cured. In the investigators' overall opinion at the end of the study, five (25%) were cured and 11 (55%) were clinically improved. The majority of adverse events reported were mild to moderate, and consistent with the known tolerability profile of terbinafine. Conclusion High-dose terbinafine (1000 mg/day) is well tolerated and clinically effective in patients with eumycetoma, a difficult-to-treat subcutaneous mycoses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available