Clinical Efficacy Studies of Haloprogin, a New Topical Antimicrobial Agent

“…Other side effects experienced by patients using haloprogin included irritation and burning on application. Previous trials using i";, haloprogin cream reported no adverse reactions (Carter, 1972;Katz & Cahn, 1972) but Hermann (1972) recorded irritation in 8 patients and a burning sensation in one patient out of a total of 472 with either dermatophyte or Candida infections treated with 1% haloprogin cream for 14 days. Allergic contact dermatitis from haloprogin cream and haloprogin solution has been reported (Berlin & Miller, 1976;Moss, 1974).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Harrison et al (1970) confirmed its antigungal activity and also showed it to be effective against yeasts and some gram-positive bacteria. Haloprogin has been found to be clinically effective for dermatophyte infections (Katz & Cahn, 1972;Hermann, 1972;Carter, 1972) and for cutaneous candidiasis (Carter & Olansky, 1974;Montes & Hermann, 1973).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A clinical double-blind trial of topical haloprogin and miconazole against superficial fungal infections

Clayton¹,

Gange²,

Macdonald³

et al. 1979

Clin Exp Dermatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary A clinical double‐blind trial of topical haloprogin ointment and miconazole cream was carried out against superficial fungal infections of the skin and erythrasma. The trial showed that haloprogin had the same broad range of activity as miconazole being effective against dermatophyte, pityriasis versicolor, Candida and erythrasma infections. Patient acceptability was not as good for haloprogin as it was for miconazole.

show abstract

“…Another testing complication is that the growth of a dermatophyte on a nutrient culture medium is not comparable to its growth on stratum corneum in vivo or in vitro [52][53] . Furthermore, in human experimental infections, investigators have found difficulty in detecting a therapeutic effect because of the natural remission of the infections [54] . Clinical trials are also difficult to control because of the lack of uniformity of naturally occurring lesions.…”

Section: In Vivo Versus In Vitromentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Models in Predicting Topical Antifungal Efficacy: Practical Aspects and Challenges

Lai¹,

Maibach²

2009

Skin Pharmacol Physiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What are efficient screening models for improved topical antifungals? The use of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) as one such parameter is discussed; we focus on the use of animal membranes for in vitro testing while highlighting the pros and cons of each model, exploring alternatives and discussing the importance of data transferability to humans and the influence of penetration kinetics in topical antifungal efficacy. Ultimately, the gold standard of testing is in vivo in humans; however, initiating with human testing, especially for novel topical antifungal agents, may be impractical, which is why we seek the ideal experimental model that most closely mimics human skin. We conclude that the pig may be an appropriate model membrane for topical antifungal testing based on its similarities in anatomical structure, physiology and permeation to human skin. Most importantly, pig and human skins appear equally permeable to several antifungals in prior in vitro and in vivo work. We do not discuss all prior work but highlight important issues in designing the protocol and parameters of the ideal experimental model for topical antifungals.

show abstract

Clinical Efficacy Studies of Haloprogin, a New Topical Antimicrobial Agent

Cited by 19 publications

References 2 publications

Pityriasis versicolor

Pityriasis versicolor

A clinical double-blind trial of topical haloprogin and miconazole against superficial fungal infections

Experimental Models in Predicting Topical Antifungal Efficacy: Practical Aspects and Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About