Itraconazole pulse therapy for the treatment of <i>Candida</i> onychomycosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this open label, multicentre trial, 44 patients with clinical and mycological evidence of Candida onychomycosis were treated with itraconazole pulse therapy. Onychomycosis of the toes alone and concomitant disease involving the fingers and toes was treated with three pulses, and onychomycosis of the fingers alone with two pulses. Final evaluation for patients with finger and toe onychomycosis was at 6-9 months and 9-12 months, respectively. There were 29 patients with toe onychomycosis (C. albicans, 27; C. glabrata, one; Candida species, one), 12 patients with finger onychomycosis (C. albicans, two; C. glabrata, one) and three patients had combined toe and finger onychomycosis (C. albicans, two; C. guillermondii, one). In the patients with toe onychomycosis mycological cure was observed in 29 of 32 patients (90.6%). There was complete cure [mycological cure (negative culture and KOH at endpoint evaluation) with clinical cure] or marked improvement (mycological cure with 75% or greater decrease in area of involvement of target nail compared with pretherapy) in 24 of 32 patients (75.0%). All 12 patients with finger onychomycosis alone due to Candida species achieved a mycological cure (100%). In this group of patients complete cure or marked improvement was observed in 11 of 12 patients (91.7%). Itraconazole pulse therapy was well tolerated and no serious adverse events were reported in the patients treated with this triazole. In conclusion, itraconazole pulse therapy is an effective and safe treatment for both finger and toe onychomycosis associated with Candida.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".