Iodochlorhydroxyquinoline and Diiodohydroxyquinoline: Animal Toxicity and Absorption in Man

Norman A. David Portland, Oregon

Search for other papers by Norman A. David in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
N. M. Phatak Portland, Oregon

Search for other papers by N. M. Phatak in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
F. B. Zener Portland, Oregon

Search for other papers by F. B. Zener in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.1944.s1-24.29
Volume/Issue:
Volume s1-24: Issue 1
Page(s):
29–33
Restricted access
Get Permissions

At this time when there is need for a careful appraisal of all available amebacides because of their extensive use by the armed forces, additional experimental and clinical data on such drugs seems appropriate. When iodochlorhydroxyquinoline (Vioform N.N.R.) was introduced as an amebacide it was stated, in summarizing the preliminary experimental work that of some eleven halogenated hydroxyquinolines this drug appeared the most promising for further study, with the possible exception of diiodohydroxyquinoline (Diodoquin) (1). Since then, Vioform has been used extensively both as an amebacide and a trichomonacide (2) and, recently, Diodoquin has been recommended for the same purposes (3). However, further experimental chemotherapeutic studies on Diodoquin appear to be lacking except for Tenney's (4) report that no untoward symptoms developed in dogs given oral doses of Diodoquin ranging from 4.0 to 6.0 grams per day for a period of six days.

Author Notes

Received:
19 Apr 1943
|
Published Online:
Jan 1944
Cover The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
Print ISSN:
0096-6746
Past two years Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 570 88 6
Full Text Views 45 1 0
PDF Downloads 28 2 0
 

 

 

 
 
Affiliate Membership Banner
 
 
Research for Health Information Banner
 
 
CLOCKSS
 
 
 
Society Publishers Coalition Banner
Save