Loading…

A comparative randomized open label study to evaluate efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness between topical 2% sertaconazole and topical 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin

Dermatophytoses are the superficial fungal infections of skin, hair, and nail. Butenafine is a benzylamine group of antifungal that inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by blocking squalene epoxidase. Sertaconazole is a newer imidazole antifungal which inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Indian journal of dermatology 2013-11, Vol.58 (6), p.451-456
Main Authors: Thaker, Saket J, Mehta, Dimple S, Shah, Hiral A, Dave, Jayendra N, Mundhava, Shailesh G
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5105-811e89bfc54ccd856bea8ec3cf46d52cb3e77d9f76a257b3667ca8f40298f9123
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5105-811e89bfc54ccd856bea8ec3cf46d52cb3e77d9f76a257b3667ca8f40298f9123
container_end_page 456
container_issue 6
container_start_page 451
container_title Indian journal of dermatology
container_volume 58
creator Thaker, Saket J
Mehta, Dimple S
Shah, Hiral A
Dave, Jayendra N
Mundhava, Shailesh G
description Dermatophytoses are the superficial fungal infections of skin, hair, and nail. Butenafine is a benzylamine group of antifungal that inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by blocking squalene epoxidase. Sertaconazole is a newer imidazole antifungal which inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by inhibiting 14-α lanosterol demethylase. The study was done to compare a newer antifungal with a relatively older one. To compare the efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness of topical 2% sertaconazole cream and 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin. Patients were randomly allocated to two treatment groups. They were advised to apply the drug topically twice a day for one month on the lesions. They were followed up at an interval of 10 days. Clinical score and Global Evaluation Response were assessed at baseline and during each follow up. A total 125 patients were recruited, out of them 111 completed the whole study. Median Sign and Symptom Score of tinea on the baseline was 9 [5,9] that was reduced to 0 [0,4] by 2% sertaconazole while it was 9 [6,9] in the butenafine group on the baseline that was reduced to 0 [0,6] at the end of the treatment. 98% and 90% of the patients got complete clearance of the lesions with butenafine and sertaconazole, respectively. Treatment with butenafine was more cost effective as compared to sertaconazole. 1% butenafine is more efficacious, cost effective, and equally safe as compared to 2% sertaconazole in the tinea infections of skin.
doi_str_mv 10.4103/0019-5154.119955
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_2243cfb13f7b4bc991212237bbcc701a</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A346352669</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_2243cfb13f7b4bc991212237bbcc701a</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A346352669</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5105-811e89bfc54ccd856bea8ec3cf46d52cb3e77d9f76a257b3667ca8f40298f9123</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkktv1DAUhSMEoqWwZ4UsoUosmBK_4niDVFU8KlViA2vLdq4Hl4w9xM6g6e_iB3Kn0xaKqixu5HvOZ_v6NM1L2p4I2vJ3bUv1QlIpTijVWspHzSHWfsE7Sh83h3ftg-ZZKZdtKzjt6dPmgAkmdK_VYfP7lPi8WtvJ1rgBMtk05FW8goHkNSQyWgcjKXUetqRmAhs7zrYCgRCit377lhQboG4J-hBU6q4DfsdKUApxUH8Bcmpeo34k7JgUmKr1OdmrPMK177ZJj4mbKyQbYgIS0YXV4s81MadCciDlR0zPmyfBjgVe3NSj5tvHD1_PPi8uvnw6Pzu9WHhJW7noKYVeu-Cl8H7oZefA9uC5D6IbJPOOg1KDDqqzTCrHu0552wfRMt0HTRk_as733CHbS7Oe4spOW5NtNNcLeVoaO9XoRzCMCeQ6yoNywnmNdsoYV855r1pqkfV-z1rPbgWDh1QnO96D3u-k-N0s88bwnilJFQLe3ACm_HOGUs0qFg_jaBPkuRgqpNZKCd2i9PV_0ss8TwlHhSohZK_xrn9VS4sXwCln3NfvoOaUi45L1nUaVYsHVEt8XjxkThAiLt_Tnzygx2-AVfQPGtq9wU-5lAnC3Uxoa3YpN7sYm12MzT7laHn17yzvDLex5n8AlEz49Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1444589366</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparative randomized open label study to evaluate efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness between topical 2% sertaconazole and topical 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Thaker, Saket J ; Mehta, Dimple S ; Shah, Hiral A ; Dave, Jayendra N ; Mundhava, Shailesh G</creator><creatorcontrib>Thaker, Saket J ; Mehta, Dimple S ; Shah, Hiral A ; Dave, Jayendra N ; Mundhava, Shailesh G</creatorcontrib><description>Dermatophytoses are the superficial fungal infections of skin, hair, and nail. Butenafine is a benzylamine group of antifungal that inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by blocking squalene epoxidase. Sertaconazole is a newer imidazole antifungal which inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by inhibiting 14-α lanosterol demethylase. The study was done to compare a newer antifungal with a relatively older one. To compare the efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness of topical 2% sertaconazole cream and 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin. Patients were randomly allocated to two treatment groups. They were advised to apply the drug topically twice a day for one month on the lesions. They were followed up at an interval of 10 days. Clinical score and Global Evaluation Response were assessed at baseline and during each follow up. A total 125 patients were recruited, out of them 111 completed the whole study. Median Sign and Symptom Score of tinea on the baseline was 9 [5,9] that was reduced to 0 [0,4] by 2% sertaconazole while it was 9 [6,9] in the butenafine group on the baseline that was reduced to 0 [0,6] at the end of the treatment. 98% and 90% of the patients got complete clearance of the lesions with butenafine and sertaconazole, respectively. Treatment with butenafine was more cost effective as compared to sertaconazole. 1% butenafine is more efficacious, cost effective, and equally safe as compared to 2% sertaconazole in the tinea infections of skin.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0019-5154</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1998-3611</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4103/0019-5154.119955</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24249897</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>India: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</publisher><subject>Butenafine ; Comparative analysis ; cost effectiveness ; Drug therapy ; Economic aspects ; efficacy ; Fungal infections ; Health aspects ; Ringworm ; safety ; Sertaconazole ; Statistical analysis ; Teaching hospitals ; Therapeutic Round ; tinea infections</subject><ispartof>Indian journal of dermatology, 2013-11, Vol.58 (6), p.451-456</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2013 Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright Medknow Publications &amp; Media Pvt Ltd Nov-Dec 2013</rights><rights>Copyright: © Indian Journal of Dermatology 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5105-811e89bfc54ccd856bea8ec3cf46d52cb3e77d9f76a257b3667ca8f40298f9123</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5105-811e89bfc54ccd856bea8ec3cf46d52cb3e77d9f76a257b3667ca8f40298f9123</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3827517/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1444589366?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24249897$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Thaker, Saket J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehta, Dimple S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shah, Hiral A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dave, Jayendra N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mundhava, Shailesh G</creatorcontrib><title>A comparative randomized open label study to evaluate efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness between topical 2% sertaconazole and topical 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin</title><title>Indian journal of dermatology</title><addtitle>Indian J Dermatol</addtitle><description>Dermatophytoses are the superficial fungal infections of skin, hair, and nail. Butenafine is a benzylamine group of antifungal that inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by blocking squalene epoxidase. Sertaconazole is a newer imidazole antifungal which inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by inhibiting 14-α lanosterol demethylase. The study was done to compare a newer antifungal with a relatively older one. To compare the efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness of topical 2% sertaconazole cream and 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin. Patients were randomly allocated to two treatment groups. They were advised to apply the drug topically twice a day for one month on the lesions. They were followed up at an interval of 10 days. Clinical score and Global Evaluation Response were assessed at baseline and during each follow up. A total 125 patients were recruited, out of them 111 completed the whole study. Median Sign and Symptom Score of tinea on the baseline was 9 [5,9] that was reduced to 0 [0,4] by 2% sertaconazole while it was 9 [6,9] in the butenafine group on the baseline that was reduced to 0 [0,6] at the end of the treatment. 98% and 90% of the patients got complete clearance of the lesions with butenafine and sertaconazole, respectively. Treatment with butenafine was more cost effective as compared to sertaconazole. 1% butenafine is more efficacious, cost effective, and equally safe as compared to 2% sertaconazole in the tinea infections of skin.</description><subject>Butenafine</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>cost effectiveness</subject><subject>Drug therapy</subject><subject>Economic aspects</subject><subject>efficacy</subject><subject>Fungal infections</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Ringworm</subject><subject>safety</subject><subject>Sertaconazole</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Teaching hospitals</subject><subject>Therapeutic Round</subject><subject>tinea infections</subject><issn>0019-5154</issn><issn>1998-3611</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptkktv1DAUhSMEoqWwZ4UsoUosmBK_4niDVFU8KlViA2vLdq4Hl4w9xM6g6e_iB3Kn0xaKqixu5HvOZ_v6NM1L2p4I2vJ3bUv1QlIpTijVWspHzSHWfsE7Sh83h3ftg-ZZKZdtKzjt6dPmgAkmdK_VYfP7lPi8WtvJ1rgBMtk05FW8goHkNSQyWgcjKXUetqRmAhs7zrYCgRCit377lhQboG4J-hBU6q4DfsdKUApxUH8Bcmpeo34k7JgUmKr1OdmrPMK177ZJj4mbKyQbYgIS0YXV4s81MadCciDlR0zPmyfBjgVe3NSj5tvHD1_PPi8uvnw6Pzu9WHhJW7noKYVeu-Cl8H7oZefA9uC5D6IbJPOOg1KDDqqzTCrHu0552wfRMt0HTRk_as733CHbS7Oe4spOW5NtNNcLeVoaO9XoRzCMCeQ6yoNywnmNdsoYV855r1pqkfV-z1rPbgWDh1QnO96D3u-k-N0s88bwnilJFQLe3ACm_HOGUs0qFg_jaBPkuRgqpNZKCd2i9PV_0ss8TwlHhSohZK_xrn9VS4sXwCln3NfvoOaUi45L1nUaVYsHVEt8XjxkThAiLt_Tnzygx2-AVfQPGtq9wU-5lAnC3Uxoa3YpN7sYm12MzT7laHn17yzvDLex5n8AlEz49Q</recordid><startdate>201311</startdate><enddate>201311</enddate><creator>Thaker, Saket J</creator><creator>Mehta, Dimple S</creator><creator>Shah, Hiral A</creator><creator>Dave, Jayendra N</creator><creator>Mundhava, Shailesh G</creator><general>Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</general><general>Medknow Publications &amp; Media Pvt. Ltd</general><general>Medknow Publications &amp; Media Pvt Ltd</general><general>Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201311</creationdate><title>A comparative randomized open label study to evaluate efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness between topical 2% sertaconazole and topical 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin</title><author>Thaker, Saket J ; Mehta, Dimple S ; Shah, Hiral A ; Dave, Jayendra N ; Mundhava, Shailesh G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5105-811e89bfc54ccd856bea8ec3cf46d52cb3e77d9f76a257b3667ca8f40298f9123</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Butenafine</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>cost effectiveness</topic><topic>Drug therapy</topic><topic>Economic aspects</topic><topic>efficacy</topic><topic>Fungal infections</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Ringworm</topic><topic>safety</topic><topic>Sertaconazole</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Teaching hospitals</topic><topic>Therapeutic Round</topic><topic>tinea infections</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Thaker, Saket J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehta, Dimple S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shah, Hiral A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dave, Jayendra N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mundhava, Shailesh G</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Indian journal of dermatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Thaker, Saket J</au><au>Mehta, Dimple S</au><au>Shah, Hiral A</au><au>Dave, Jayendra N</au><au>Mundhava, Shailesh G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparative randomized open label study to evaluate efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness between topical 2% sertaconazole and topical 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin</atitle><jtitle>Indian journal of dermatology</jtitle><addtitle>Indian J Dermatol</addtitle><date>2013-11</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>58</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>451</spage><epage>456</epage><pages>451-456</pages><issn>0019-5154</issn><eissn>1998-3611</eissn><abstract>Dermatophytoses are the superficial fungal infections of skin, hair, and nail. Butenafine is a benzylamine group of antifungal that inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by blocking squalene epoxidase. Sertaconazole is a newer imidazole antifungal which inhibits the biosynthesis of ergosterol by inhibiting 14-α lanosterol demethylase. The study was done to compare a newer antifungal with a relatively older one. To compare the efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness of topical 2% sertaconazole cream and 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin. Patients were randomly allocated to two treatment groups. They were advised to apply the drug topically twice a day for one month on the lesions. They were followed up at an interval of 10 days. Clinical score and Global Evaluation Response were assessed at baseline and during each follow up. A total 125 patients were recruited, out of them 111 completed the whole study. Median Sign and Symptom Score of tinea on the baseline was 9 [5,9] that was reduced to 0 [0,4] by 2% sertaconazole while it was 9 [6,9] in the butenafine group on the baseline that was reduced to 0 [0,6] at the end of the treatment. 98% and 90% of the patients got complete clearance of the lesions with butenafine and sertaconazole, respectively. Treatment with butenafine was more cost effective as compared to sertaconazole. 1% butenafine is more efficacious, cost effective, and equally safe as compared to 2% sertaconazole in the tinea infections of skin.</abstract><cop>India</cop><pub>Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd</pub><pmid>24249897</pmid><doi>10.4103/0019-5154.119955</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0019-5154
ispartof Indian journal of dermatology, 2013-11, Vol.58 (6), p.451-456
issn 0019-5154
1998-3611
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_2243cfb13f7b4bc991212237bbcc701a
source Publicly Available Content Database; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; PubMed Central
subjects Butenafine
Comparative analysis
cost effectiveness
Drug therapy
Economic aspects
efficacy
Fungal infections
Health aspects
Ringworm
safety
Sertaconazole
Statistical analysis
Teaching hospitals
Therapeutic Round
tinea infections
title A comparative randomized open label study to evaluate efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness between topical 2% sertaconazole and topical 1% butenafine in tinea infections of skin
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T17%3A34%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparative%20randomized%20open%20label%20study%20to%20evaluate%20efficacy,%20safety%20and%20cost%20effectiveness%20between%20topical%202%25%20sertaconazole%20and%20topical%201%25%20butenafine%20in%20tinea%20infections%20of%20skin&rft.jtitle=Indian%20journal%20of%20dermatology&rft.au=Thaker,%20Saket%20J&rft.date=2013-11&rft.volume=58&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=451&rft.epage=456&rft.pages=451-456&rft.issn=0019-5154&rft.eissn=1998-3611&rft_id=info:doi/10.4103/0019-5154.119955&rft_dat=%3Cgale_doaj_%3EA346352669%3C/gale_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5105-811e89bfc54ccd856bea8ec3cf46d52cb3e77d9f76a257b3667ca8f40298f9123%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1444589366&rft_id=info:pmid/24249897&rft_galeid=A346352669&rfr_iscdi=true