The use of terbinafine in the treatment of onychomycosis in adults and special populations: a review of the evidence.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Terbinafine is an allylamine with fungicidal activity, first approved for the treatment of onychomycosis in the United Kingdom in the early 1990s, and in the US in 1996. Terbinafine is the most frequently prescribed oral antifungal agent in the US and Canada for onychomycosis. Its efficacy and safety in dermatophyte toenail onychomycosis in adults has been established in many studies. In fact, 18 randomized controlled trials have shown terbinafine to be highly effective, with a meta-average for mycological cure of 76% +/- 3% (mean +/- standard error). In large surveillance studies, terbinafine exhibited excellent safety profiles consistent with results obtained in pivotal studies. Additionally, terbinafine has been reported to be superior to both itraconazole and fluconazole in comparative studies in the treatment of dermatophyte toenail onychomycosis. Recent studies have reported terbinafine to be more cost effective than griseofulvin, fluconazole, or itraconazole. Terbinafine has also been used to treat onychomycosis effectively and safely in special patient populations, such as children, the elderly, immunocompromised patients, diabetics, and those with Down syndrome. Terbinafine should therefore be considered for the management of onychomycosis in adults based on its effectiveness, broad spectrum, fungicidal nature, established safety profile, and very low occurrence of drug interactions. Furthermore, the data support the use of terbinafine to treat dermatophyte onychomycosis in children and the elderly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".