Abstract
In any large-scale programme aimed at drug discovery, screening procedures will be necessary in order to identify compounds of potential interest. Candidate substances for screening may include chemical compounds selected at random or according to particular structural features from an existing chemical collection, compounds designed and synthesised specifically by project chemists and broths or extracts of natural product origin. The purpose of an antifungal screen is simply to provide a yes/no answer to the question, ‘Is there sufficient interaction between this sample and fungi to warrant further investigation?’ This further investigation of compounds of potential interest is termed evaluation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Beggs WH, Hughes CE (1987) Exploitation of the direct cell damaging action of antifungal azoles. Diag Microbiol Infect Dis 6: 1–3
Boyle FT, Ryley JF, Wilson RG (1987) In vitro-in vivo correlations with azole antifungals. In: Fromtling RA (ed) Recent trends in the discovery, development and evaluation of antifungal agents. J R Prous, Barcelona, pp S1:31–S1:41
Clayton YM (1987) The in vitro activity of terbinafine against uncommon fungal pathogens. In: Fromtling RA (ed) Recent trends in the discovery, development and evaluation of antifungal agents. J R Prous, Barcelona, pp 433–439
Drouhet E (1988) Standardization of antifungal susceptibility testing. An introductory overview. Proc Xth ISHAM Congress, Barcelona, pp 203–209
Dupont B, Drouhet E (1979) In vitro synergy and antagonism of antifungal agents against yeast-like fungi. Postgrad Med J 55: 683–686
Galgiani JN (1986) Antifungal susceptibility testing: recent findings and experience. Antimicrobic Newsletter 3: 17–22
Galgiani JN (1987a) Antifungal susceptibility tests. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 31: 1867–1870
Galgiani JN (1987b) The need for improved standardization in antifungal susceptibility testing. In: Fromtling RA (ed) Recent trends in the discovery, development and evaluation of antifungal agents. J R Prous, Barcelona, pp 15–24
Guinet R, Nerson D, De Closets F, Dupouy-Camet J, Kures L, Marjollet M, Poirot JL, Ross A, Texier-Maugein J, Voile PJ (1988) Collaborative evaluation in seven laboratories of a standardized micromethod for yeast susceptibility testing. J Clin Microbiol 26: 2307–2312
Minagawa H, Kitaura K, Nakamizo N (1983) Effects of pH on the activity of ketoconazole against Candida albicans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 23: 105–107
Odds FC (1982) Interactions among amphotericin B, 5-fluorocytosine, ketoconazole, and miconazole against pathogenic fungi in vitro. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 22: 763–770
Odds FC (1985) Laboratory tests for the activity of imidazole and triazole antifungal agents in vitro. Semin Dermatol 4: 260–270
Odds FC, Abbott AB (1984) Relative inhibition factors — a novel approach to the assessment of antifungal antibiotics in vitro. J Antimicrob Chemother 13: 31–43
Odds FC, Webster CE, Abbott AB (1984) Antifungal relative inhibition factors: BAY 1-9139, bifonazole, butoconazole, isoconazole, itraconazole (R 51211), oxicon- azole, Ro-14-4767/002, sulconazole, terconazole and vibunazole (BAY n-7133) compared in vitro with nine established antifungal agents. J Antimicrob Chemother 14: 105–114
Odds FC, Cockayne A, Hayward J, Abbott AB (1985) Effects of imidazoleand triazolederivative antifungal compounds on the growth and morphological development of Candida albicans hyphae. J Gen Microbiol 131: 2581–2589
Odds FC, Abbott AB, Pye G, Troke PF (1986) Improved method for estimation of azole antifungal inhibitory concentrations against Candida species, based on azole/antibiotic interactions. J Med Vet Mycol 24: 305–311
Petranyi G, Meingassner JG, Mieth H (1987) Antifungal activity of the allylamine derivative terbinafine in vitro. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 31: 1365–1368
Polak A, Dixon DM (1987) Antifungal activity of amorolfine (Ro 14-4767/002) in vitro and in vivo. In: Fromtling RA (ed) Recent trends in the discovery, development and evaluation of antifungal agents. J R Prous, Barcelona, pp 555–573
Richardson K, Andrews RJ, Marriott MS, Tarbit MH, Troke PF (1986) Correlation of in vitro and in vivo activity of azole antifungals. In: Iwata K, Vanden Bossche H (eds) In vitro and in vivo evaluation of antifungal agents. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 147–149
Rumler W, Heins S, Heins J (1984) Relations between the concentration and the contact-time in the antifungal activity of 5-flubrocytosine, bifonazole and BAY N 7133 to Candida albicans. Mykosen 27: 436–442
Ryley JF, Rathmell WG (1984) Discovery of antifungal agents: in vitro and in vivo testing. In: Trinci APJ, Ryley JF (eds) Mode of action of antifungal agents. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 63–87 (Br My col Soc Symp No 9 )
Ryley JF, Wilson RG, Gravestock MB, Poyser JP (1981) Experimental approaches to antifungal chemotherapy. Adv Pharmacol Chemother 18: 49–176
Ryley JF, Wilson RG, Barrett-Bee KJ (1984) Azole resistance in Candida albicans. Sabouraudia: J Med Vet Mycol 22: 53–63
Scott EM, Gorman SP, Wright LR (1984) The effect of imidazoles on germination of arthrospores and microconidia of Trichophyton mentagrophytes. J Antimicrob Chemother 13: 101–110
Shadomy S (1987) Preclinical evaluation of antifungal agents: design of in vitro screens. In: Fromtling RA (ed) Recent trends in the discovery, development and evaluation of antifungal agents. J R Prous, Barcelona, pp S1:1–S1:10
Shadomy S, Dixon DM, May R (1982) A comparison of bifonazole (BAY H 4502) with clotrimazole in vitro. Sabouraudia 20: 313–323
Shadomy S, Espinel-Ingroff A, Kerkering TM (1984) In-vitro studies with four new antifungal agents: BAY n 7133, bifonazole (BAY h 4502), ICI 153,066 and Ro 14-4767/002. Sabouraudia: J Med Vet Mycol 22: 7–15
Sud IJ, Feingold DS (1981) Heterogeneity of action mechanisms among antimycotic imidazoles. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 20: 71–74
Van Cutsem J, Van Gerven F, Janssen PAJ (1986) The in vitro evaluation of azoles. In: Iwata K, Vanden Bossche H (eds) In vitro and in vivo evaluation of antifungal agents. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 51–64
Van Cutsem J, Van Gerven F, Janssen PAJ (1987) The in vitro and in vivo antifungal activity of itraconazole. In: Fromtling RA (ed) Recent trends in the discovery, development and evaluation of antifungal agents. J R Prous, Barcelona, pp 177–192
Wilson RG (1985) Factors which affect the fungicidal activity of imidazoles and triazoles. IXth ISHAM Cong, Atlanta, Georgia, Abst Rl-9
Wright LR, Scott EM, Gorman SP (1983) The sensitivity of mycelium, arthrospores and microconidia of Trichophyton mentagrophytes to imidazoles determined by in vitro tests. J Antimicrob Chemother 12: 317–327
Yamaguchi H, Hiratani T, Uchida K (1987) The in vitro activity and evaluation of bifonazole. In: Fromtling RA (ed) Recent trends in the discovery, development and evaluation of antifungal agents. J R Prous, Barcelona, pp 335–352
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1990 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wilson, R.F., Ryley, J.F. (1990). Screening and Evaluation In Vitro. In: Ryley, J.F. (eds) Chemotherapy of Fungal Diseases. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, vol 96. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75458-6_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75458-6_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-75460-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-75458-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive