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
Restricted access

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

Save