From the Toxicology Section, Division of Emergency Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis.
CORRESPONDENCE TO: Michael E. Mullins, MD, Toxicology Section, Division of Emergency Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Campus Box 8072, 660 S Euclid Ave, St. Louis, MO 63110; e-mail: email@example.com
Editor’s Note: Authors are invited to respond to Correspondence that cites their previously published work. Those responses appear after the related letter. In cases where there is no response, the author of the original article declined to respond or did not reply to our invitation.
FINANCIAL/NONFINANCIAL DISCLOSURES: The authors have reported to CHEST that no potential conflicts of interest exist with any companies/organizations whose products or services may be discussed in this article.
Reproduction of this article is prohibited without written permission from the American College of Chest Physicians. See online for more details.
We read with great interest the recent article by Gores et al1 in CHEST (October 2014). While applauding the successful outcome of Amanita mushroom poisoning, it mystifies us that the authors perceived any ethical quandary concerning the use of silibinin. We would consider it more ethically questionable to deprive the patient an opportunity to receive silibinin.
Silibinin is the treatment best supported by available canine2,3 and human evidence.4-6 It has long been approved in Europe, where it is the drug of choice for amatoxin poisoning. While the market for silibinin in the United States is too small to justify efforts by the manufacturer to pursue US Food and Drug Administration approval, the drug is essentially available for compassionate use under the National Institutes of Health-registered study protocol referenced in the original case report.7
We recognize the rationale for IV N-acetylcysteine, IV penicillin G, and multidose-activated charcoal. All three have low risk and a modest role in treatment of amatoxin poisoning, but evidence of their efficacy is weak to nonexistent.
The authors seem concerned about the botanical origins of the drug. We point out that we have no anxiety about using other drugs derived from plants such as the willow and the poppy in our daily practice.
Most patients with amatoxin poisoning survive, and it is impossible to say whether this patient’s outcome would have been different without silibinin. Given the available evidence, we would want silibinin if we were inadvertently poisoned with amatoxin-containing mushrooms.
Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.
Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.
Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.
Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.
Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.
Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.
Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.
Download citation file:
Web of Science® Times Cited:
Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.
Athens and Shibboleth are access management services that provide single sign-on to protected resources. They replace the multiple user names and passwords necessary to access subscription-based content with a single user name and password that can be entered once per session. It operates independently of a user's location or IP address. If your institution uses Athens or Shibboleth authentication, please contact your site administrator to receive your user name and password.