You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 101 No. 1, JANUARY 1958 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Treatment of Experimental Histoplasmosis with Amphotericin B

G. L. BAUM, M.D.; JAN SCHWARZ, M.D.; C. J. K. WANG, Ph.D.

AMA Arch Intern Med. 1958;101(1):84-86.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Previous work1-3 has indicated that the drug amphotericin B (an antifungal antibiotic isolated from an unidentified species of Streptomyces) has antifungal activity against Histoplasma capsulatum. This has been shown both in vitro and in experimental infection. Our own previous results as well as the results of other groups have indicated that in spite of the relative insolubility of the drug definite activity against experimental histoplasmosis has been demonstrated.1-3

The hamster has been the experimental animal of choice in histoplasmosis in our experience, and for this reason it has been used in the present work to further evaluate the effect of amphotericin B in experimental disease.

Previously the combination of amphotericin B with sulfadiazine had given better results than amphotericin alone. The sulfadiazine alone had little effect in our hands.1,2

The relatively insoluble nature of the drug, amphotericin B, was the most serious drawback to its use in . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Author Affiliations

Cincinnati

From the Clinical Laboratories, Jewish Hospital, and the Laboratory of Mycology, Departments of Dermatology and Pathology, Cincinnati General Hospital.


Footnotes

Submitted for publication April 15, 1957.

This work was supported by a grant from the Squibb Institute for Medical Research, New Brunswick, N. J. and Grant E-576, National Institutes of Health, U. S. Public Health Service.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1958 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.