Pau d'Arco: Antifungal Use, Cancer Claim History & Safety — A Research-Backed Guide

What is pau d'arco?

Pau d'arco (Portuguese for "bow stick," referring to the wood's use in making bows) is the common name for the inner bark of Tabebuia impetiginosa (also classified as Handroanthus impetiginosus), a tall flowering tree native to the Amazon rainforest and the tropical forests of Central and South America. It is also known as lapacho (Spanish), taheebo (trade name), and ipe roxo (Brazilian Portuguese, meaning "purple ipe" after its striking purple flowers).

Indigenous peoples of the Amazon — including the Inca, Calaway, and various Brazilian tribes — have used pau d'arco bark preparations for thousands of years to treat infections, fevers, and inflammatory conditions. It reached mainstream Western supplement markets in the 1970s–1980s, primarily on the back of cancer-cure claims that were subsequently not validated in clinical trials.

The supplement-relevant part of the plant is the inner bark (not the outer bark, which has negligible bioactive content). The wood itself is not used medicinally. Two species are commonly used interchangeably in commerce: T. impetiginosa (purple-flowered, preferred) and T. avellanedae (considered equivalent by most botanical authorities).

Active compounds: naphthoquinone chemistry

The primary bioactives in pau d'arco belong to the naphthoquinone family — a group of compounds also found in walnut shells and vitamin K (phylloquinone is a naphthoquinone). The two most studied are:

• Lapachol — the dominant naphthoquinone in pau d'arco bark. It is structurally similar to vitamin K2 and acts as a vitamin K antagonist at higher doses (explaining the warfarin interaction). In cell studies, lapachol inhibits DNA topoisomerase enzymes, impairs mitochondrial electron transport in microbes, and generates reactive oxygen species that damage microbial cell membranes. It has poor and variable oral bioavailability in humans.
• Beta-lapachone — a more potent derivative that forms from lapachol under acidic conditions (including stomach acid). Beta-lapachone has greater cytotoxic activity than lapachol and has been investigated as a potential pharmaceutical agent in NQO1-positive tumors, though as a standalone drug — not as pau d'arco bark extract.
• Other naphthoquinones: xyloidone, alpha-lapachone, and various anthraquinones contribute to the biological activity profile but are present in smaller quantities.

Quality control note: the naphthoquinone content of pau d'arco products varies enormously depending on bark source, processing method, and storage. Lapachol content in commercial products ranges from essentially zero (tea bags) to several milligrams per serving in concentrated extracts. No standardization benchmark is widely accepted.

What the evidence actually supports

1. Antimicrobial and antifungal activity (in vitro)

The strongest case for pau d'arco is its in vitro (laboratory) antimicrobial activity. Multiple cell-based studies have demonstrated that lapachol and beta-lapachone inhibit the growth of:

• Candida albicans and Candida tropicalis — common pathogenic yeasts
• Cryptococcus neoformans — an opportunistic fungal pathogen
• Staphylococcus aureus and Helicobacter pylori — bacterial pathogens
• Trypanosoma cruzi — the parasite causing Chagas disease

These are real and reproducible findings in cell culture. The critical limitation is that no quality human RCTs have demonstrated that oral pau d'arco supplementation produces clinically meaningful antifungal or antibacterial effects in people. The gap between in vitro potency and clinical efficacy is enormous — shaped by poor oral bioavailability of naphthoquinones, rapid hepatic metabolism, and the inability to achieve tissue concentrations in humans comparable to those used in petri dishes without causing toxicity.

2. Anti-inflammatory (limited, non-human data)

Beta-lapachone inhibits NF-kappaB signaling and reduces pro-inflammatory cytokine production in animal and cell models. This has led to speculation about pau d'arco as an anti-inflammatory supplement, but no human trials have been conducted to support this application.

3. Traditional immune tonic

Pau d'arco tea prepared from the inner bark has been used for generations as a general immune tonic in South American traditional medicine systems. Whether this represents a placebo effect, a mild and unmeasured immune modulation, or specific naphthoquinone activity is unknown. The traditional preparation (bark simmered in water for 20 minutes) does extract some lapachol, though quantities vary.

The cancer claim: what really happened with the NCI

In the early 1970s, the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) became interested in lapachol after preliminary data suggested anti-tumor activity in animal models. Clinical trials were initiated. The program was abandoned for a straightforward reason: the blood concentrations of lapachol required for anti-tumor activity in humans caused unacceptable toxicity — primarily nausea, vomiting, anemia, and coagulation abnormalities (consistent with its vitamin K antagonism). There was no therapeutic window in which lapachol killed tumor cells without seriously harming healthy tissues.

This history is important because:

• The NCI abandonment is sometimes cited by supplement marketers as evidence of a "suppressed cure" — this is false. The drug failed on safety grounds in proper clinical evaluation.
• Supplement doses of pau d'arco bark deliver far lower lapachol concentrations than those tested in the NCI trials — meaning the supplement is simultaneously safer and likely ineffective against cancer.
• Pau d'arco is not a cancer treatment and should never be used in place of proven oncology therapies. Patients with cancer who are interested in complementary approaches should discuss them with their oncology team.

The Candida claim: in vitro vs. human reality

Pau d'arco is heavily marketed for systemic Candida overgrowth — a condition that is frequently self-diagnosed based on vague symptoms (fatigue, brain fog, bloating) rather than laboratory confirmation. Several issues apply:

• True systemic Candida infections (candidemia) are serious, life-threatening conditions in immunocompromised patients that require prescription antifungal medications. Pau d'arco is not an adequate treatment.
• The popularized concept of widespread "Candida overgrowth" causing fatigue and cognitive symptoms in otherwise healthy people lacks clinical evidence and diagnostic validity.
• Even if Candida overgrowth were present, no evidence demonstrates that oral pau d'arco supplementation achieves antifungal tissue concentrations. The in vitro data do not translate to clinical antifungal efficacy based on available human evidence.
• Tea preparations (the traditional form) extract less lapachol than claimed by marketers and would be even less likely to achieve meaningful antifungal concentrations.

How much pau d'arco should you take?

If used at all, traditional and cautious dosing guidelines are:

• Traditional tea: 1–2 g dried inner bark simmered in water for 15–20 minutes, 3–4 cups per day — the form with the longest safety track record at these doses
• Capsule/tablet: 500 mg to 1 g dried bark equivalent 2–3 times daily, not exceeding 2 g/day total
• Duration: Short-term use only (2–4 weeks maximum) is prudent given limited long-term safety data and hepatotoxicity concerns at higher doses
• Standardization: Products standardized to lapachol content (if available) allow more consistent dosing, but no consensus on target lapachol level exists

Note: doses required for the in vitro antifungal effects are not achievable at safe oral doses in humans. Do not attempt to "dose up" to achieve antimicrobial levels — this is the route to toxicity.

Safety, side effects, and hepatotoxicity

At traditional tea doses, pau d'arco appears relatively well tolerated for short-term use. Risk increases substantially with concentrated extracts, high doses, and prolonged use.

Common side effects

• Nausea and vomiting — lapachol is irritating to the GI tract, particularly at higher doses
• Diarrhea and GI cramping
• Dizziness and lightheadedness
• Anemia (iron-deficiency pattern) with high-dose or prolonged use

Hepatotoxicity

Case reports of pau d'arco-associated liver damage exist, most associated with high-dose or prolonged concentrated extract use. The mechanism likely involves reactive oxygen species generated by naphthoquinone redox cycling causing oxidative hepatocellular injury. People with liver disease, heavy alcohol use, or who take other hepatotoxic medications should avoid pau d'arco. Monitor for liver enzyme elevation (fatigue, jaundice, right upper quadrant pain) during use and discontinue immediately if these occur.

Pregnancy

Pau d'arco should not be used during pregnancy. Lapachol has demonstrated teratogenic effects in animal studies and is suspected of being an abortifacient. Breastfeeding safety is unestablished.

Drug and nutrient interactions

• Warfarin and other anticoagulants — lapachol is a vitamin K antagonist; combining with warfarin substantially elevates INR and bleeding risk. This is a potentially serious interaction. Avoid pau d'arco if taking any anticoagulant.
• Antiplatelet drugs (aspirin, clopidogrel) — additive bleeding risk from anticoagulant mechanism.
• Iron supplements — naphthoquinones can chelate iron and interfere with absorption. Separate doses by at least 2 hours if both are used.
• Hepatotoxic medications (acetaminophen at high doses, methotrexate, isoniazid) — additive liver stress risk. Avoid combination.
• Immunosuppressants — theoretical interaction via immune-modulating effects; not well characterized in humans.

Check our free interaction checker for additional combinations.

Who might benefit — and who shouldn't bother

Frequently asked questions

Related ingredients and articles