Cited by 66Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityReproductive tract infections researchOcular Infections and Treatments

Treatment of Non-Albicans Candida Vaginitis with Amphotericin B Vaginal Suppositories

Phillips, Albert John·2005·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective This study was undertaken to investigate whether amphotericin B vaginal suppositories would be effective in the treatment of non- albicans Candida vaginitis in women who failed conventional therapy.Study design Thirty-two patients were identified with non- albicans Candida vaginitis. These patients were treated with conventional antifungal agents. Ten patients had persistence of the non- albicans Candida infection after treatment. Amphotericin B 50-mg vaginal suppositories were given nightly for 14 days to this subgroup of treatment failures.Results Of 10 women, 8 (80%) who were treated with amphotericin B vaginally initially showed no further infection. One of the treatment successes had 2 recurrences and responded to a second course of amphotericin B but failed a third course. If this patient is considered a treatment failure, then amphotericin B vaginal suppositories were successful in 70% of patients. The medication was well tolerated and local side effects were minimal.Conclusion Amphotericin B vaginal suppositories are a viable treatment option for refractory vaginitis caused by non- albicans Candida .

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.03.034

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a study of 10 patients with non-albicans infection, 8 showed no further infection after treatment with 50 mg amphotericin B vaginal suppositories for 14 days.

    “What is more, in the study conducted by Philipps between 1995 and 2004, 10 patients identified with non-albicans (9 with C. glabrata and 1 with C. tropicalis) infection were treated with 50 mg amphotericin B vaginal suppositories for 14 days, and after that, 8 of them showed no further infection (2 who failed were infected with C. glabrata) [43].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 22 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Phillips, A. J.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Phillips, Albert John
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-06
Volume
192
Issue
6
Pages
2009-2012
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2113992587
Cited by
66
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Infections and Treatments
Keywords
amphotericin B, vaginal suppositories, treatment failure, antifungal therapy, Candida, treatment efficacy, recurrence
MeSH terms
Administration, Intravaginal, Adult, Aged, Amphotericin B, Antifungal Agents, Candida, Candidiasis, Vulvovaginal, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review