4.5 Article

Enhancement of triclabendazole action in vivo against a triclabendazole-resistant isolate of Fasciola hepatica by co-treatment with ketoconazole

期刊

VETERINARY PARASITOLOGY
卷 177, 期 3-4, 页码 305-315

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.12.002

关键词

Fasciola hepatica; Liver fluke; Triclabendazole resistance; Ketoconazole; Scanning electron microscopy

资金

  1. European Union [FOOD-CT-200X-023025]
  2. BBSRC/Defra [C00082X/1]
  3. DARDNI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An in vivo study in the laboratory rat model was carried out to monitor morphological changes in adult Fasciola hepatica over a 4-day period resulting from combination treatment of triclabendazole (TCBZ) and the metabolic inhibitor, ketoconazole (KTZ). Rats were infected with the TCBZ-resistant Oberon isolate of F. hepatica and divided into 3 groups at 12 weeks post-infection. The first group was dosed orally with TCBZ at a dosage of 10 mg/kg and KTZ at a dosage of 10 mg/kg. Flukes were recovered at 24, 48, 72 and 96h post-treatment (p.t.). A second group of rats was treated with TCBZ alone (10 mg/kg) and sacrificed at 96 h p.t. The third group acted as untreated controls. Surface changes were monitored by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). In flukes from the TCBZ+ KTZ-treated group, the results showed a progressive and time-dependent increase in the level of disruption to the tegumental syncytium. Swelling, furrowing, blebbing and sloughing of the syncytium increased with time p.t. Another feature seen was a thick layer of tegumental shedding in some fluke samples at different times p.t. By comparison, flukes treated with TCBZ alone remained unaffected. The results demonstrated that the Oberon isolate is only sensitive to drug action in the presence of ketoconazole, indicating that combining triclabendazole with a metabolic inhibitor could be used to preserve the effectiveness of the drug against TCBZ-resistant populations of F. hepatica. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据