Cutaneous candidiasis - an evidence-based review of topical and systemic treatments to inform clinical practice.

Cutaneous candidiasis is a common skin disease, and several treatments have been investigated within the last fifty years. Yet, systematic reviews are lacking, and evidence-based topical and systemic treatment strategies remain unclear. Thus, the aim of this review was to summarize efficacy and adverse effects of topical and oral therapies for cutaneous candidiasis in all age groups. Two individual researchers searched PubMed and EMBASE for 'cutaneous candidiasis' and 'cutaneous candidiasis treatment', 'intertrigo', 'diaper dermatitis' and 'cheilitis'. Searches were limited to 'English language', 'clinical trials' and 'human subjects', and prospective clinical trials published in abstracts or articles were included. In total, 149 studies were identified, of which 44 were eligible, comprising 41 studies of 19 topical therapies and four studies of three systemic therapies for cutaneous candidiasis. Topical therapies were investigated in infants, children, adolescents, adults and elderly, while studies of systemic therapies were limited to adolescents and adults. Clotrimazole, nystatin and miconazole were the most studied topical drugs and demonstrated similar efficacy with complete cure rates of 73%-100%. Single-drug therapy was as effective as combinations of antifungal, antibacterial and topical corticosteroid. Four studies investigated systemic therapy, and oral fluconazole demonstrated similar efficacy to oral ketoconazole and topical clotrimazole. Limitations to this review were mainly that heterogeneity of studies hindered meta-analyses. In conclusions, clotrimazole, nystatin and miconazole were the most studied topical drugs and demonstrated equal good efficacy and mild adverse effects similar to combinations of antifungal, antibacterial and topical corticosteroids. Oral fluconazole was as effective as topical clotrimazole and is the only commercially available evidence-based option for systemic treatment of cutaneous candidiasis.

A survey among dermatologists: diagnostics of superficial fungal infections - what is used and what is needed to initiate therapy and assess efficacy?

BACKGROUND: Superficial fungal infections are common. It is important to confirm the clinical diagnosis by mycological laboratory methods before initiating systemic antifungal treatment, especially as antifungal sensitivity and in vitro susceptibility may differ between different genera and species. For many years, the gold standard for diagnosis of superficial fungal infections has been direct fungal detection in the clinical specimen (microscopy) supplemented by culturing. Lately, newer molecular based methods for fungal identification have been developed. OBJECTIVE: This study was initiated to focus on the current usage of mycological diagnostics for superficial fungal infections by dermatologists. It was designed to investigate whether it was necessary to differentiate between initial diagnostic tests and those used at treatment follow-up in specific superficial fungal infections. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed among members of the EADV mycology Task Force and other dermatologists with a special interest in mycology and nail disease. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 62 dermatologists of whom 38 (61%) completed the whole survey, 7 (11%) partially completed and 17 (27%) did not respond. Nearly, all respondents (82-100%) said that ideally they would use the result of direct microscopy (or histology) combined with a genus/species directed treatment of onychomycosis, dermatophytosis, Candida- and Malassezia-related infections. The majority of the dermatologists used a combination of clinical assessment and direct microscopy for treatment assessment and the viability of the fungus was considered more important at this visit than when initiating the treatment. Molecular based methods were not available for all responders. CONCLUSION: The available diagnostic methods are heterogeneous and their usage differs between different practices as well as between countries. The survey confirmed that dermatologists find it important to make a mycological diagnosis, particularly prior to starting oral antifungal treatment in order to confirm the diagnose and target the therapy according to genus and species.

In vivo efficacy and pharmacokinetics of voriconazole in an animal model of dermatophytosis.

The standard treatment for tinea capitis caused by Microsporum species for many years has been oral griseofulvin, which is no longer universally marketed. Voriconazole has been demonstrated to inhibit growth of Microsporum canis in vitro. We evaluated the efficacy and tissue pharmacokinetics of oral voriconazole in a guinea pig model of dermatophytosis. Guinea pigs (n = 16) were inoculated with M. canis conidia on razed skin. Voriconazole was dosed orally at 20 mg/kg/day for 12 days (days 3 to 14). The guinea pigs were scored clinically (redness and lesion severity) and mycologically (microscopy and culture) until day 17. Voriconazole concentrations were measured day 14 in blood, skin biopsy specimens, and interstitial fluid obtained by microdialysis in selected animals. Clinically, the voriconazole-treated animals had significantly less redness and lower lesion scores than untreated animals from days 7 and 10, respectively (P < 0.05). Skin scrapings from seven of eight animals in the voriconazole-treated group were microscopy and culture negative in contrast to zero of eight animals from the untreated group at day 14. The colony counts per specimen were significantly higher in samples from untreated animals (mean colony count of 28) than in the voriconazole-treated animals (<1 in the voriconazole group [P < 0.0001]). The voriconazole concentration in microdialysate (unbound) ranged from 0.9 to 2.0 microg/ml and in the skin biopsy specimens total from 9.1 to 35.9 microg/g. In conclusion, orally administered voriconazole leads to skin concentrations greater than the necessary MICs for Microsporum and was shown to be highly efficacious in an animal model of dermatophytosis. Voriconazole may be a future alternative for treatment of tinea capitis in humans.