Neomycin 0.5% / Chlorhexidine hydrochloride 0.1% nasal cream
Requires a prescription from a doctor or prescriber
Official documents, adverse reaction reporting, and safety monitoring
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Official medicine documents
Yellow Card
Report side effects (MHRA)
Drug safety updates
MHRA alerts for Neomycin + Chlorhexidine
Safety monitoring data
Yellow Card reports
The MHRA Yellow Card scheme collects reports of suspected side effects from healthcare professionals and patients. View the Drug Analysis Profile (iDAP) for real-world adverse reaction data.
View Drug Analysis Profile
Browse all Drug Analysis Profiles A–Z
Browse all iDAP reports
Interactive Drug Analysis Profiles for all medicines
Report a side effect
Submit a Yellow Card report to the MHRA
Data from the MHRA Yellow Card scheme. A reported reaction does not necessarily mean the medicine caused it. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
EudraVigilance
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) collects suspected adverse reaction reports from across the EU/EEA through the EudraVigilance system. Search for safety data on this medicine.
Search EudraVigilance database
Browse substances A–Z in the European adverse reaction database
About EudraVigilance
Learn about EU pharmacovigilance and safety monitoring
EudraVigilance data is published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A suspected adverse reaction is not necessarily caused by the medicine.
1 branded products available
MHRA licensed products
View all licensed products for Neomycin + Chlorhexidine on the MHRA register
Naseptin nasal cream
This is the NHS Drug Tariff indicative price used for reimbursement purposes. It may not reflect the price paid by patients or pharmacies.
View full Drug TariffSource: NHS Drug Tariff via NHSBSA. Derived from dm+d VMPP (Virtual Medicinal Product Pack) pricing data. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Therapeutically similar medicines
Similarity is based on WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification and on a factual NHS dm+d therapeutic-grouping code prefix. Source data: NHS dm+d via TRUD (OGL v3.0), WHO ATC/DDD Index.
NHS prescribing volume and spending trends
Check stock at pharmacies and supply information
Pharmacy stock checkers
Search for this medicine at major UK pharmacy chains. These links open the retailer's own website — results depend on their current online catalogue.
Supply & safety information
Official UK regulator monitoring and safety alerts
Pharmacy links redirect to the retailer's own search and do not represent real-time stock levels. Shortage and safety information sourced from MHRA drug safety updates (gov.uk, Crown Copyright under OGL v3.0).
Codes for healthcare professionals and prescribing systems
These codes are used by healthcare IT systems and prescribers to identify this medicine.
NHS UK identifiers
Browse tools
SNOMED CT and dm+d codes from NHS TRUD (Technology Reference data Update Distribution), licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. ATC codes from the WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (whocc.no).
Active and completed clinical studies from ClinicalTrials.gov
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Data accessed via ClinicalTrials.gov API v2. Trial information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Academic studies and reviews for this medicine's active substance
Showing the 50 most relevant studies.
Reviews & meta-analyses: 29 · Randomised trials: 12 · 2000–2026
Showing the 50 most relevant studies, sorted by most relevant.
A. Solderer, M. Kaufmann, Deborah Hofer, et al.
Clinical Oral Investigations, 2018
M. Noto, Henry J. Domenico, Daniel W Byrne, et al.
JAMA, 2015
P. James, H. Worthington, C. Parnell, et al.
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017
Z. Brookes, R. Bescos, L. Belfield, et al.
Journal of Dentistry, 2020
Frank Poppolo Deus, Aviv Ouanounou
International Dental Journal, 2022
F. Cieplik, N. Jakubovics, W. Buchalla, et al.
Frontiers in Microbiology, 2019
G. Kampf
The Journal of hospital infection, 2016
Li Wei, Yan Li, Xiao-yu Li, et al.
BMC Infectious Diseases, 2019
Sunayana Manipal, Sajjid Hussain, Umesh Wadgave, et al.
Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2016
Chaúque BJM, Chagas LB, da Silva TCB, et al.
2026
- Amoeba
- Amebiasis
- Antiprotozoal Agents
Devastating or nearly invariably fatal infections caused by free-living amoebae (FLA), including Acanthamoeba keratitis (AK), granulomatous amoebic encephalitis (GAE), and primary amoebic meningoencephalitis (PAM), remain a significant public health concern, driven by increasing case numbers, geographic expansion, and the lack of approved, effective, and safe treatments. Despite decades of research, no new drugs have been successfully approved, highlighting the severe limitations of de novo drug development for these infections, particularly for GAE and PAM, largely due to the challenges of conducting clinical trials for these rare and rapidly lethal diseases. In this context, drug repurposing represents a cost-effective and promising strategy to accelerate therapeutic advances and overcome key bottlenecks of conventional drug development. Accordingly, we conducted a systematic review of in vitro studies and animal models of AK, GAE, and PAM reported in indexed databases to identify promising drug repurposing candidates against FLA infections. After screening 23,624 records, 112 studies were included in the analysis. Overall, 2726 drugs and drug combinations, spanning 865 pharmacological classes and approved for 565 therapeutic indications, were assessed for their repurposing potential. Among these, 166 compounds showed substantial trophocidal activity (≥IC50) at potentially translatable concentrations (≤10 µM), including six with additional cysticidal activity. In vitro, four compounds were active against Balamuthia mandrillaris, 44 against Acanthamoeba spp. (three cysticidal), and 115 against Naegleria spp. (three cysticidal). In in vivo studies, sulfadiazine and rifampicin were effective as preventive or early monotherapies for GAE. For AK, the combination of polyhexamethylene biguanide, neomycin, and atropine, as well as voriconazole and nitazoxanide monotherapies, showed the greatest promise. In PAM, azithromycin alone or in combination with amphotericin B emerged as the most promising therapeutic options. Further studies are required to advance the clinical translatability of these findings. To the best of our knowledge, this work provides the first comprehensive and integrated synthesis of repurposable drug candidates against FLA infections.
Abstract licence: CC BY
Sources: aggregated from Europe PMC (EMBL-EBI), OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed and other open scholarly databases. Retracted articles are excluded. Study information is provided for research purposes and does not constitute medical advice.
Scientific data (pharmacology, interactions, ADME) is not yet available for this medicine. Clinical sections are sourced from the NHS dm+d database.