, Volume 175, Issue 1–2, pp 141–145 | Cite as

In Vitro Antifungal Activity of Micafungin and Caspofungin Against Dermatophytes Isolated from China

  • Ying-qiu Bao
  • Zhe Wan
  • Ruo-yu LiEmail author



The aims of this study are to investigate the in vitro activities of micafungin and caspofungin that are two new echinocandin antifungal drugs against clinically isolated dermatophytes in China and to define MEC (minimal effective concentration) as the reading endpoints of this study in accordance with (Clinical and laboratory Standards Institute) CLSI M38-A2 reference.


Minimal effective concentrations (MECs) of micafungin and caspofungin for 82 dermatophyte strains were determined according to CLSI (formerly NCCLS) M38-A2 broth microdilution methods.


(1) The MEC90s of micafungin for Trichophyton violaceum and Trichophyton tonsurans were 0.25 μg/mL, and for Microsporum canis and Trichophyton verrucosum were 0.06 μg/mL. The MEC90s for Trichophyton rubrum, Trichophyton mentagrophytes, Microsporum gypseum and Epidermophyton floccosum were 0.03 μg/mL. (2) The MEC90s of caspofungin for T. rubrum, T. violaceum and T. tonsurans were 1 μg/mL, and for T. mentagrophytes, M. canis, M. gypseum, E. floccosum and T. verrucosum were 0.5 μg/mL. (3) Compared with caspofungin, micafungin demonstrated lower MEC value to dermatophytes (P < 0.05).


Micafungin has stronger in vitro antifungal activity than caspofungin.


Dermatophyte Antifungal susceptibility testing In vitro Caspofungin Micafungin 



We are grateful to Professor Glenn Bulmer for his great suggestions to this manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Douglas CM. Fungal beta(1,3)-d-glucansynthesis. Med Mycol. 2001;39(suppl 1):55–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maesaki S, Hossain MA, Miyazaki Y, Tomono K, Tashiro T, Kohno S. Efficacy of FK463, a (1,3)-beta-d-glucan synthase inhibitor, in disseminated azole-resistant Candida albicans infection in mice. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000;44:1728–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sevtap A, Yurdakul P, Hascelik G. Comparison of two methods and three end points in determination of in vitro activity of micafungin against Aspergillus spp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47:2640–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Theuretzbacher U. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of echinocandins. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2004;23:805–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of filamentous fungi; approved standard—M38-A2. Wayne, PA, USA: CLSI; 2008.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berg JC, Hamacher KL, Roberts GD. Pseudomycetoma caused by Microsporum canis in an immunosuppressed patient: a case report and review of the literature. J Cutan Pathol. 2007;34:431–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nir-Paz R, Elinav H, Pierard GE, Walker D, Maly A, Shapiro M, Barton RC, Polacheck I. Deep infection by Trichophyton rubrum in an immunocompromised patient. J Clin Microbiol. 2003;41:5298–301.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Imhof A, Balajee SA, Marr KA. New methods to assess susceptibilities of Aspergillus isolates to caspofungin. J Clin Microbiol. 2003;41:5683–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cetinkaya Z, Kiraz N, Karaca S, Kulac M, Ciftci IH, Aktepe OC, Altindis M, Kiyildi N, Piyade M. Antifungal susceptibilities of dermatophytic agents isolated from clinical specimens. Eur J Dermatol. 2005;15:258–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nakai T, Uno J, Otomo K, Ikeda F, Tawara S, Goto T, Nishimura K, Miyaji M. In vitro activity of FK463, a novel lipopeptide antifungal agent, against a variety of clinically important molds. Chemotherapy. 2002;48:78–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Dermatology, Peking University First Hospital, Research Center for Medical MycologyPeking UniversityXicheng District, BeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of DermatologyBeijing HospitalBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations