OBJECTIVE: This overview compares and contrasts the pharmacotherapy of itraconazole with that of other antifungal agents. DATA SOURCES: Primary literature on itraconazole was identified through a medical literature search from 1976 through 1991. This search included journal articles, abstracts, conference proceedings, and reports of animal and human research published in the English language. STUDY SELECTION: All primary literature was reviewed regardless of the study design or outcome. Literature evaluations of efficacy were ranked using a literature rating scale (Dalen JE, Hirsh J. Arch Intern Med 1986;146:462–72), which was slightly modified to include case reports and observations. DATA EXTRACTION: All data were collected and represented with a primary focus on itraconazole's mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy in systemic mycotic infections, drug interactions, and adverse reactions. All articles were referenced in the final data presentation unless grouped data had been accurately reviewed and published. DATA SYNTHESIS: Despite the paucity of controlled comparative trials with itraconazole in patients with deep mycoses, results on efficacy are encouraging. It is still unclear what role itraconazole will have in the prophylaxis of fungal infections in immunocompromised hosts. The favorable pharmacokinetic profile permits once- or twice-daily administration and itraconazole appears to be safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Itraconazole should prove to be a useful replacement for ketoconazole on hospital formularies. This recommendation is based on itraconazole's greater apparent safety and efficacy. Reevaluation of this agent will be necessary upon the release of newer imidazoles and triazoles.