Terbinafine Resistance in Trichophyton rubrum and Trichophyton indotineae: A Literature Review.

BACKGROUND/

OBJECTIVES

Terbinafine has been the gold standard for the management of superficial fungal infections. The etiological agent generally is Trichophyton rubrum (T. rubrum); however, there has been increased reporting of a new terbinafine-resistant strain of the T. mentagrophytes complex (T. mentagrophytes ITS genotype VIII otherwise known as T. indotineae). Here, we review the epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, and treatment of T. rubrum and T. indotineae infections.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase (Ovid), and Web of Science, resulting in 83 qualified studies with data summarized for clinical features, antifungal susceptibility, and terbinafine resistance mechanisms and mutations.

RESULTS

Dermatophytosis is most commonly caused by T. rubrum; however, in certain parts of the world, especially in the Indian subcontinent, T. indotineae infections have been reported more frequently. The majority of T. rubrum isolates remain susceptible to terbinafine (over 60% of isolates show MIC50 and MIC90 < 0.5 µg/mL). In contrast, for T. indotineae, 30% of isolates exhibit MIC50 ≥ 0.5 µg/mL and 80% exhibit MIC90 ≥ 0.5 µg/mL. Frequently detected squalene epoxidase (SQLE) mutations in T. rubrum are Phe397Leu/Ile (41.6%) and Leu393Phe (20.8%); in T. indotineae, these include Phe397Leu (33.0%) and Ala448Thr (24.5%). Other potential terbinafine resistance mechanisms in T. rubrum and T. indotineae are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

T. rubrum generally remain susceptible in vitro to terbinafine in contrast to T. indotineae. The essential components of an effective antifungal stewardship emphasize accurate clinical and laboratory diagnosis, susceptibility testing, and appropriate antifungal therapy selection with a multidisciplinary approach.