HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by David, N. A. Articles by Zener, F. B. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by David, N. A. Articles by Zener, F. B.

Iodochlorhydroxyquinoline and Diiodohydroxyquinoline: Animal Toxicity and Absorption in Man¹

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.

Received April 19, 1943.
¹ From the Department of Pharmacology, University of Oregon Medical School, Portland, Oregon. Supported, in part, by a grant from Ciba Pharmaceutical Company, Ind., Summit, New Jersey.