An outbreak of dermatophytosis in pigs caused byMicrosporum canis

Cabo, J. F. González; Asensio, M. C. Bárcena; Rodríguez, F; Lázaro, J. A. Amigot

doi:10.1007/bf01103464

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to González Cabo et al (1995), a pig farm in Spain became infected with Microsporum canis resulting in 100%, 95%, and 75% morbidity in sows, new-borns, and feedlot animals, respectively. The animals were treated with a commercial aerosol that contained 20 mg Dichlorophene, among other ingredients.…”

Section: Antimicrobial Effects Dichlorophenementioning

confidence: 99%

Safety Assessment of Dichlorophene and Chlorophene1

Yamarik¹

2004

Int J Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dichlorophene is a halogenated phenolic compound that functions as a bacteriocide and fungicide in cosmetics. Chlorophene is a halogenated phenolic compound that functions as a biocide and preservative in cosmetics. Dichlorophene was reported to be used in a total of five cosmetic formulations at concentrations of 0% to 1.0%, but Chlorophene was not reported to be used. Dichlorophene is prohibited for use in cosmetic ingredients in Japan. In Europe, the maximum authorized concentration allowed for Dichlorophene is 0.5% and for Chlorophene is 0.2%. The major impurity of Dichlorophene is the trimer 4-chloro-2,6-bis(5-chloro-2-hydroxy-benzyl)phenol. In rats, Dichlorophene sulfate, Dichlorophene monoglucuronide, and Dichlorophene diglucuronide were the major metabolites of Dichlorophene and were excreted, mainly in the urine. The glucuronic acid conjugate, the sulfate ester conjugate, and two minor metabolites of Chlorophene were the metabolites found in rat urine. Chlorophene was incompletely absorbed through the rat skin. These chemicals exhibited low toxicity in acute oral toxicity studies in several animal species. Some evidence of toxicity with both chemicals was found in short-term oral toxicity studies in mice and rats; nephropathy was the principal finding. Chronic toxicity data were not available for Dichlorophene. Rats and mice dosed with Chlorophene for 2 years had a dose-related and sex-related increase in the severity of nephropathy. In animal tests, Dichlorophene and Chlorophene were ocular irritants. No inhalation toxicity data were available for these ingredients. Dichlorophene up to 10% concentration resulted in no to minimal irritation when applied to the intact and abraded skin of rabbits. Chlorophene was severely irritating to rabbits in most dermal irritation studies. Studies on guinea pigs gave positive and negative results in sensitization tests of Dichlorophene. A dose-related contact hypersensitivity response to Chlorophene was reported in mice. No reproductive or developmental toxicity data were available for Dichlorophene, but there was some evidence of non-dose-dependent developmental toxicity with Chlorophene in rabbits. Dichlorophene was positive in the Ames mutagenicity assay, but not in mammalian or fruit fly test systems. Chlorophene was mutagenic in four in vitro mammalian test systems. Carcinogenicity studies for Dichlorophene were not found. Neoplasms were not observed in rats treated with Chlorophene for 2 years; however a significant incidence of neoplasms was observed in mice so treated. A 1-year National Toxicology Program (NTP) study concluded that Chlorophene was a cutaneous irritant and a weak skin tumor promoter but had no activity as an initiator or complete carcinogen. Dichlorophene was not a sensitizer in clinical dermal sensitization tests. Some reactions to Chlorophene occurred in some, but not all, clinical dermal sensitization tests. Positive photopatch tests to Dichlorophene were found in 13/469 patients. Although these ingredients were ocular irritants at high concentrations, the risk at concentrations which are actually used in cosmetic formulations was uncertain. Overall, the available data were insufficient to support safety of Dichlorophene or Chlorophene. Additional data needed include (1) method of manufacture and impurities data (especially the trimer in Dichlorophene); (2) photosensitization and photo-carcinogenicity data for Dichlorophene; (3) dermal reproductive and developmental toxicity data for Dichlorophene (as a function of dose); and (4) ocular irritation at concentration of use, if available.

show abstract

Section: Antimicrobial Effects Dichlorophenementioning

confidence: 99%

Safety Assessment of Dichlorophene and Chlorophene1

Yamarik¹

2004

Int J Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Common and Emerging Dermatophytoses in Animals: Well-Known and New Threats

Hubka

Peano

Čmoková

et al. 2018

Emerging and Epizootic Fungal Infections in Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dermatophytoses in Animals

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dermatophytoses are one of the most frequent skin diseases of pets and livestock. Contagiousness among animal communities, high cost of treatment, difficulty of control measures, and the public health consequences of animal ringworm explain their great importance. A wide variety of dermatophytes have been isolated from animals, but a few zoophilic species are responsible for the majority of the cases, viz. Microsporum canis, Trichophyton mentagrophytes, Trichophyton equinum and Trichophyton verrucosum, as also the geophilic species Microsporum gypseum. According to the host and the fungal species involved, the typical aspect of dermatophytic lesions may be modified. As a consequence, an accurate clinical examination, a good differential diagnosis and laboratory analyses are required for a correct identification. Few antifungal agents are available and licenced for use in veterinary practice, and the use of systemic drugs is limited in livestock due to the problems of residues in products intended for human consumption. The high resistance of the dermatophyte arthroconidia in the environment, the multiplicity of host species, and the confinement of animals in breedings are cause of an enzootic situation in many cases. Prevention is difficult, but research development on the immune response to dermatophytes and the use of vaccination, especially in cattle, have brought some interesting results.

show abstract

An outbreak of dermatophytosis in pigs caused byMicrosporum canis

Abstract: An outbreak of dermatophytosis caused by Microsporum canis in a porcine farm is described. The morbidity was 100% among sows, 95% among new-borns and 75% among feedlot animals. Microsporum canis was also isolated from walls and environmental air.

Cited by 7 publications

References 6 publications

Safety Assessment of Dichlorophene and Chlorophene1

Safety Assessment of Dichlorophene and Chlorophene1

Common and Emerging Dermatophytoses in Animals: Well-Known and New Threats

Dermatophytoses in Animals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About