Experimental guinea pig model of dermatophytosis: a simple and useful tool for the evaluation of new diagnostics and antifungals

References

• Gupta AK, Tu LQ. Onychomycosis therapies: strategies to improve efficacy. Dermatol Clin 2006; 24: 381–386
   Google Scholar
• Seebacher C, Abeck D, Brasch J, et al. Tinea capitis: ringworm of the scalp. Mycoses 2007; 50: 218–226
   Google Scholar
• Hay RJ. The future of onychomycosis therapy may involve a combination of approaches. Br J Dermatol 2001; 145: 3–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chittasobhon N, Smith JMB. The production of experimental dermatophyte lesions in guinea pigs. J Invest Dermatol 1979; 73: 198–201
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van CJ. Animal Models for dermatomycotic infections. Current Topics Medical Mycology, MR McGinnis, M Borgers. Springer-Verlag, New York 1989; 1–35
   Google Scholar
• Treiber A, Pittermann W, Schuppe HC. Efficacy testing of antimycotic prophylactics in an animal model. Int J Hyg Environ Health 2001; 204: 239–243
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghannoum MA, Hossain MA, Long L, et al. Evaluation of antifungal efficacy in an optimized animal model of Trichophyton mentagrophytes-dermatophytosis. J Chemother 2004; 16: 139–144
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petranyi G, Meingassner JG, Mieth H. Activity of terbinafine in experimental fungal infections of laboratory animals. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1987; 31: 1558–1561
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagino K, Shimohira H, Ogawa M, et al. Comparison of the therapeutic efficacy of oral doses of fluconazole and itraconazole in a guinea pig model of dermatophytosis. J Infect Chemother 2000; 6: 41–44
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Green FIII, Balish E. Trichophyton mentagrophytes dermatophytosis in germfree guinea pigs. J Invest Dermatol 1980; 75: 476–480
   Google Scholar
• Kerbs S, Allen AM. Effect of occlusion on Trichophyton mentagrophytes infections in guinea pigs. J Invest Dermatol 1978; 71: 301–304
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg JH, King RD, Krebs S, et al. A quantitative dermatophyte infection model in the guinea pig-a parallel to the quantitated human infection model. J Inves Dermatol 1976; 67: 704–708
   Google Scholar
• Valiant ME, Frost BM. An experimental model for evaluation of antifungal agents in a Trichophyton mentagrophytes infection of guinea pigs. Chemotherapy 1984; 30: 54–60
   Google Scholar
• Brillowska-Dabrowska A, Saunte DM, Arendrup MC. Five-hour diagnosis of dermatophyte nail infections with specific detection of Trichophyton rubrum. J Clin Microbiol 2007; 45: 1200–1204
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arenas R, Dominguez-Cherit J, Fernandez LM. Open randomized comparison of itraconazole versus terbinafine in onychomycosis. Int J Dermatol 1995; 34: 138–143
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Petrini B, von Rosen ML. Optimal dermatophyte diagnosis requires both microscopy and culture]. Lakartidningen 2002; 99: 4084
   Google Scholar
• Van CJ. Oral and parenteral treatment with itraconazole in various superficial and systemic experimental fungal infections. Comparisons with other antifungals and combination therapy. Br J Clin Pract Suppl 1990; 71: 32–40
   Google Scholar
• Van CJ, Van GF, Janssen PA. Activity of orally, topically, and parenterally administered itraconazole in the treatment of superficial and deep mycoses: animal models. Rev Infect Dis 1987; 9: 15–32
   Google Scholar
• Borgers M, Xhonneux B, Van Cutsem J. Oral itraconazole versus topical bifonazole treatment in experimental dermatophytosis. Mycoses 1993; 36: 105–115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perea S, Fothergill AW, Sutton DA, et al. Comparison of in vitro activities of voriconazole and five established antifungal agents against different species of dermatophytes using a broth macrodilution method. J Clin Microbiol 2001; 39: 385–388
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Favre B, Hofbauer B, Hildering KS, et al. Comparison of in vitro activities of 17 antifungal drugs against a panel of 20 dermatophytes by using a microdilution assay. J Clin Microbiol 2003; 41: 4817–4819
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar