Therapeutic efficacy of topically used luliconazole vs. terbinafine 1% creams

Abstract

Dermatophytoses are the most common agents of superficial fungal infections in the world, affecting a substantial part of the human population. 1,2 The increased frequency of fungal infectious diseases recorded in the last several years can be attributed to environmental factors, lifestyle and adaptation of fungi to the environment. For example, improper hygiene, occlusive footwear, socioeconomic conditions, new types of professions, animal breeding in flats, frequent trips to warm climate regions, civilisation diseases such as diabetes mellitus, increasing resistance of pathogens to antifungal substances and even climate change have been attributed to this notable increase in the prevalence of fungal infections. [3][4][5][6][7][8] In recent years, the introduction of new antifungal agents has provided major advances in the therapy of dermatophytosis. 3,8,9 One of such drugs, luliconazole, was first approved for therapy in Japan in 2005.Later, it was approved in India and the United States in 2010 and 2013, respectively. 10,11 This drug has an imidazole moiety introduced into the ketene dithioacetate structure, which effectively interferes with ergosterol biosynthesis by inhibition of sterol 14 α-demethylase. 11,12

Dermatology mycology diagnostics in Ireland: National deficits identified in 2022 that are relevant internationally

“… 43 , 44 This is exemplified in India where terbinafine resistant T . indotineae are highly prevalent, 45 and terbinafine resistance in dermatophytes has also been reported in Iran, Japan, Denmark, Belgium, Finland, Switzerland, Germany, the United States, Canada, Bahrain and Brazil. 44 Terbinafine resistance is especially concerning because alternative therapeutic options to treat dermatophytoses are limited.…”