Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Drugs 3/2009

01-02-2009 | Adis Drug Evaluation

Liposomal Amphotericin B

A Review of its Use as Empirical Therapy in Febrile Neutropenia and in the Treatment of Invasive Fungal Infections

Authors: Marit D. Moen, Katherine A. Lyseng-Williamson, Lesley J. Scott

Published in: Drugs | Issue 3/2009

Login to get access

Summary

Abstract

Liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome®) is a lipid-associated formulation of the broad-spectrum polyene antifungal agent amphotericin B. It is active against clinically relevant yeasts and moulds, including Candida spp., Aspergillus spp. and filamentous moulds such as Zygomycetes, and is approved for the treatment of invasive fungal infections in many countries worldwide. It was developed to improve the tolerability profile of amphotericin B deoxycholate, which was for many decades considered the gold standard of antifungal treatment, despite being associated with infusion-related events and nephrotoxicity.
In well controlled trials, liposomal amphotericin B had similar efficacy to amphotericin B deoxycholate and amphotericin B lipid complex as empirical therapy in adult and paediatric patients with febrile neutropenia. In addition, caspofungin was noninferior to liposomal amphotericin B as empirical therapy in adult patients with febrile neutropenia. For the treatment of confirmed invasive fungal infections, liposomal amphotericin B was more effective than amphotericin B deoxycholate treatment in patients with disseminated histoplasmosis and AIDS, and was noninferior to amphotericin B deoxycholate in patients with acute cryptococcal meningitis and AIDS. In adults, micafungin was shown to be non-inferior to liposomal amphotericin B for the treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidiasis. Data from animal studies suggested that higher dosages of liposomal amphotericin B might improve efficacy; however, in the AmBiLoad trial in patients with invasive mould infection, there was no statistical difference in efficacy between the standard dosage of liposomal amphotericin B 3 mg/kg/day and a higher 10 mg/kg/day dosage, although the standard dosage was better tolerated.
Despite being associated with fewer infusion-related adverse events and less nephrotoxicity than amphotericin B deoxycholate and amphotericin B lipid complex, liposomal amphotericin B use is still limited to some extent by these adverse events. Both echinocandins were better tolerated than liposomal amphotericin B. The cost of liposomal amphotericin B therapy may also restrict its use, but further pharmacoeconomic studies are required to fully define its cost effectiveness compared with other antifungal agents. Based on comparative data from well controlled trials, extensive clinical experience and its broad spectrum of activity, liposomal amphotericin B remains a first-line option for empirical therapy in patients with febrile neutropenia and in those with disseminated histoplasmosis, and is an option for the treatment of AIDS-associated cryptococcal meningitis, and for invasive Candida spp. or Aspergillus spp. infections.

Pharmacological Properties

Amphotericin B, a macrocyclic, polyene antifungal agent, is thought to act by binding to ergosterol, the principal sterol in fungal cell membranes and Leishmania cells. This results in a change in membrane permeability, causing metabolic disturbance, leakage of small molecules and, as a consequence, cell death. In vitro and in vivo studies have shown that liposomal amphotericin B remains closely associated with the liposomes in the circulation, thereby reducing the potential for nephrotoxicity and infusion-related toxicity associated with conventional amphotericin B. Amphotericin B shows very good in vitro activity against a broad spectrum of clinically relevant fungal isolates, including most strains of Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp., and other filamentous fungi such as Zygomycetes. Liposomal amphotericin B has proven effective in various animal models of fungal infections, including those for candidiasis, aspergillosis, fusariosis and zygomycosis. Liposomal amphotericin B also shows immuno-modulatory effects, although the mechanisms involved are not fully understood, and differ from those of amphotericin B deoxycholate and amphotericin B colloidal dispersion.
In adult patients with febrile neutropenia, intravenous liposomal amphotericin B has nonlinear pharmacokinetics, with higher than dose-proportional increases in exposure being consistent with reticuloendothelial saturation and redistribution of amphotericin B in the plasma compartment. Liposomal amphotericin B is rapidly and extensively distributed after single and multiple doses, with steady-state concentrations of amphotericin B attained within 4 days and no clinically relevant accumulation of the drug following multiple doses of 1–7.5 mg/kg/day. In autopsy tissue, the highest concentrations of the drug were found in the liver and spleen, followed by the kidney, lung, myocardium and brain tissue. Elimination of liposomal amphotericin B, like that of amphotericin B deoxycholate, is poorly understood; its route of metabolism is not known and its excretion has not been studied. The terminal elimination half-life is about 7 hours. No dosage adjustment is required based on age or renal impairment.

Clinical Efficacy

In several randomized, double-blind trials (n = 73–1095) in adult and/or paediatric patients, liposomal amphotericin B was effective as empirical therapy or as treatment for confirmed invasive fungal infections, including invasive candidiasis, candidaemia, invasive mould infection (mainly aspergillosis), histoplasmosis and cryptococcal meningitis. All agents were administered as an intravenous infusion; the typical dosage for liposomal amphotericin B was 3 mg/kg/day. Treatment was generally given for 1–2 weeks.
Participants in trials evaluating empirical therapy had neutropenia and a persistent fever despite antibacterial treatment and had received chemotherapy or undergone haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. As empirical therapy in adult and paediatric patients, liposomal amphotericin B appeared to be as effective as amphotericin B deoxycholate (approximately 50% of patients in each group achieved treatment success) or amphotericin B lipid complex (approximately 40% of liposomal amphotericin B recipients experienced treatment success). Of note, in the first trial, results of the statistical test to determine equivalence between treatments were not reported. In the second trial, efficacy was assessed as an ‘other’ endpoint. In another trial, caspofungin was shown to be noninferior to liposomal amphotericin B, with approximately one-third of patients in each group experiencing treatment success.
Liposomal amphotericin B was significantly more effective than amphotericin B deoxycholate for the treatment of moderate to severe disseminated histoplasmosis in patients with AIDS, with 88% and 64% of patients, respectively, having a successful response. Liposomal amphotericin B was noninferior to amphotericin B deoxycholate for the treatment of cryptococcal meningitis in terms of mycological success. Micafungin therapy was shown to be noninferior to liposomal amphotericin B for the treatment of adult patients with candidaemia or invasive candidiasis. In a substudy in paediatric patients, which was not powered to determine noninferiority, liposomal amphotericin B was as effective as micafungin for the treatment of candidaemia or invasive candidiasis. In this patient population, within each trial, 90% of adult patients and approximately three-quarters of paediatric patients in both treatment groups experienced a successful response. In patients with invasive mould infection (mainly aspergillosis), there was no difference in efficacy between a higher dosage of liposomal amphotericin B (10mg/kg/day) and the standard dosage (3 mg/kg/day), with 46% and 50% of patients experiencing a favourable overall response.

Tolerability

In well designed clinical trials, liposomal amphotericin B was generally at least as well tolerated as other lipid-associated formulations of amphotericin B and better tolerated than amphotericin B deoxycholate in adult and paediatric patients. Compared with other amphotericin B formulations, liposomal amphotericin B treatment was associated with a lower incidence of infusion-related adverse events and nephrotoxicity. A higher than recommended dosage of liposomal amphotericin B (10 mg/kg/day) was associated with an increased incidence of nephrotoxicity compared with the standard dosage (3 mg/kg/day), although the incidence of infusion-related reactions did not differ between treatment groups.
In general, liposomal amphotericin B treatment was not as well tolerated as echinocandin therapy in well designed clinical trials. As empirical therapy or for the treatment of confirmed invasive fungal infections in adult patients, liposomal amphotericin B recipients experienced more infusion-related events and nephrotoxicity than caspofungin or micafungin recipients. There was no difference in the incidence of these adverse events between the liposomal amphotericin B and micafungin groups in a study in paediatric patients.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Cornely OA. Aspergillus to zygomycetes: causes, risk factors, prevention, and treatment of invasive fungal infections. Infection 2008 Aug; 36(4): 296–313PubMedCrossRef Cornely OA. Aspergillus to zygomycetes: causes, risk factors, prevention, and treatment of invasive fungal infections. Infection 2008 Aug; 36(4): 296–313PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Marchetti O, Cordonnier C, Calandra T. Empirical antifungal therapy in neutropaenic cancer patients with persistent fever. Eur J Cancer Suppl 2007; 5(2): 32–42CrossRef Marchetti O, Cordonnier C, Calandra T. Empirical antifungal therapy in neutropaenic cancer patients with persistent fever. Eur J Cancer Suppl 2007; 5(2): 32–42CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Olson JA, Adler-Moore JP, Jensen GM, et al. Comparison of the physicochemical, antifungal, and toxic properties of two liposomal amphotericin B products. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008 Jan; 52(1): 259–68PubMedCrossRef Olson JA, Adler-Moore JP, Jensen GM, et al. Comparison of the physicochemical, antifungal, and toxic properties of two liposomal amphotericin B products. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008 Jan; 52(1): 259–68PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Kshirsagar NA, Pandya SK, Kirodian GB, et al. Liposomal drug delivery system from laboratory to clinic. J Postgrad Med 2005; 51 Suppl. 1: S5–15PubMed Kshirsagar NA, Pandya SK, Kirodian GB, et al. Liposomal drug delivery system from laboratory to clinic. J Postgrad Med 2005; 51 Suppl. 1: S5–15PubMed
5.
go back to reference AmBisome® (liposomal amphotericin B): Irish summary of product characteristics. Gilead Sciences International Limited, 2007 Apr AmBisome® (liposomal amphotericin B): Irish summary of product characteristics. Gilead Sciences International Limited, 2007 Apr
6.
go back to reference Coukell AJ, Brogden RN. Liposomal amphotericin B: therapeutic use in the management of fungal infections and visceral leishmaniasis. Drugs 1998 Apr; 55(4): 585–612PubMedCrossRef Coukell AJ, Brogden RN. Liposomal amphotericin B: therapeutic use in the management of fungal infections and visceral leishmaniasis. Drugs 1998 Apr; 55(4): 585–612PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Adler-Moore J, Proffitt RT. AmBisome: liposomal formulation, structure, mechanism of action and pre-clinical experience. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002 Feb; 49 Suppl. 1: 21–30CrossRef Adler-Moore J, Proffitt RT. AmBisome: liposomal formulation, structure, mechanism of action and pre-clinical experience. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002 Feb; 49 Suppl. 1: 21–30CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Adler-Moore JP, Proffitt RT. Amphotericin B lipid preparations: what are the differences? Clin Microbiol Infect 2008; 14 Suppl. 4: 25–36PubMedCrossRef Adler-Moore JP, Proffitt RT. Amphotericin B lipid preparations: what are the differences? Clin Microbiol Infect 2008; 14 Suppl. 4: 25–36PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Takemoto K, Yamamoto Y, Ueda Y. Evaluation of antifungal pharmacodynamic characteristics of AmBisome against Candida albicans. Microbiol Immunol 2006; 50(8): 579–86PubMed Takemoto K, Yamamoto Y, Ueda Y. Evaluation of antifungal pharmacodynamic characteristics of AmBisome against Candida albicans. Microbiol Immunol 2006; 50(8): 579–86PubMed
10.
go back to reference Torrado JJ, Espada R, Ballesteros MP, et al. Amphotericin B formulations and drug targeting. J Pharm Sci 2008; 97(7): 2405–25PubMedCrossRef Torrado JJ, Espada R, Ballesteros MP, et al. Amphotericin B formulations and drug targeting. J Pharm Sci 2008; 97(7): 2405–25PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Sabra R, Zeinoun N, Sharaf LH, et al. Role of humoral mediators in, and influence of a liposomal formulation on, acute amphotericin B nephrotoxicity. Pharmacol Toxicol 2001 Apr; 88(4): 168–75PubMedCrossRef Sabra R, Zeinoun N, Sharaf LH, et al. Role of humoral mediators in, and influence of a liposomal formulation on, acute amphotericin B nephrotoxicity. Pharmacol Toxicol 2001 Apr; 88(4): 168–75PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Barchiesi F, Arzeni D, Compagnucci P, et al. In vitro activity of five antifungal agents against clinical isolates of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Med Mycol 1998 Dec; 36: 437–40PubMedCrossRef Barchiesi F, Arzeni D, Compagnucci P, et al. In vitro activity of five antifungal agents against clinical isolates of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Med Mycol 1998 Dec; 36: 437–40PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Tzatzarakis MN, Tsatsakis AM, Charvalos E, et al. Comparison of in vitro activities of amphotericin, clotrimazole, econazole, miconazole, and nystatin against Fusarium oxysporum. J Environ Sci Health B 2001 May; 36(3): 331–40PubMedCrossRef Tzatzarakis MN, Tsatsakis AM, Charvalos E, et al. Comparison of in vitro activities of amphotericin, clotrimazole, econazole, miconazole, and nystatin against Fusarium oxysporum. J Environ Sci Health B 2001 May; 36(3): 331–40PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Lewis RE, Wiederhold NP, Klepser ME. In vitro pharmacodynamics of amphotericin B, itraconazole, and voriconazole against Aspergillus, Fusarium, and Scedosporium spp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005 Mar; 49(3): 945–51PubMedCrossRef Lewis RE, Wiederhold NP, Klepser ME. In vitro pharmacodynamics of amphotericin B, itraconazole, and voriconazole against Aspergillus, Fusarium, and Scedosporium spp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005 Mar; 49(3): 945–51PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Kantarcioğlu AS, Yucel A. In-vitro activities of terbinafine, itraconazole and amphotericin B against Aspergillus and Cladosporium species. J Chemother 2002 Dec; 14(6): 562–7PubMed Kantarcioğlu AS, Yucel A. In-vitro activities of terbinafine, itraconazole and amphotericin B against Aspergillus and Cladosporium species. J Chemother 2002 Dec; 14(6): 562–7PubMed
16.
go back to reference Lacroix C, de Chauvin MF. In vitro activity of amphotericin B, itraconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole, caspofungin and terbinafine against Scytalidium dimidiatum and Scytalidium hyalinum clinical isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008 Apr; 61(4): 835–7PubMedCrossRef Lacroix C, de Chauvin MF. In vitro activity of amphotericin B, itraconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole, caspofungin and terbinafine against Scytalidium dimidiatum and Scytalidium hyalinum clinical isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008 Apr; 61(4): 835–7PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Torres-Narbona M, Guinea J, Martínez-Alarcón J, et al. In vitro activities of amphotericin B, caspofungin, itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole against 45 clinical isolates of zygomycetes: comparison of CLSI M38-A, Sensititre YeastOne, and the Etest. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007 Mar; 51(3): 1126–9PubMedCrossRef Torres-Narbona M, Guinea J, Martínez-Alarcón J, et al. In vitro activities of amphotericin B, caspofungin, itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole against 45 clinical isolates of zygomycetes: comparison of CLSI M38-A, Sensititre YeastOne, and the Etest. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007 Mar; 51(3): 1126–9PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Sun QN, Fothergill AW, McCarthy DI, et al. In vitro activities of posaconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, amphotericin B, and fluconazole against 37 clinical isolates of zygomycetes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 May; 46(5): 1581–2PubMedCrossRef Sun QN, Fothergill AW, McCarthy DI, et al. In vitro activities of posaconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, amphotericin B, and fluconazole against 37 clinical isolates of zygomycetes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 May; 46(5): 1581–2PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Gómez-López A, Cuenca-Estrella M, Monzón A, et al. In vitro susceptibility of clinical isolates of Zygomycota to amphotericin B, flucytosine, itraconazole and voriconazole. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001 Dec; 48(6): 919–21PubMedCrossRef Gómez-López A, Cuenca-Estrella M, Monzón A, et al. In vitro susceptibility of clinical isolates of Zygomycota to amphotericin B, flucytosine, itraconazole and voriconazole. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001 Dec; 48(6): 919–21PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts; third informational supplement M27-S 3. Wayne (PA): Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2008; 28 (15) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts; third informational supplement M27-S 3. Wayne (PA): Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2008; 28 (15)
21.
go back to reference Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts; approved standard-third edition M27-A 3. Wayne (PA): Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2008; 28 (14) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts; approved standard-third edition M27-A 3. Wayne (PA): Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2008; 28 (14)
22.
go back to reference Carrillo-Muñoz AJ, Quindós G, Ruesga M, et al. Antifungal activity of posaconazole compared with fluconazole and amphotericin B against yeasts from oropharyngeal candidiasis and other infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005 Mar; 55(3): 317–9PubMedCrossRef Carrillo-Muñoz AJ, Quindós G, Ruesga M, et al. Antifungal activity of posaconazole compared with fluconazole and amphotericin B against yeasts from oropharyngeal candidiasis and other infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005 Mar; 55(3): 317–9PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Pemán J, Cantón E, Gobernado M. Epidemiology and antifungal susceptibility of Candida species isolated from blood: results of a 2-year multicentre study in Spain. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2005 Jan; 24(1): 23–30PubMedCrossRef Pemán J, Cantón E, Gobernado M. Epidemiology and antifungal susceptibility of Candida species isolated from blood: results of a 2-year multicentre study in Spain. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2005 Jan; 24(1): 23–30PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Chiu YS, Chang SC, Hsueh PR, et al. Survey of amphotericin B susceptibility of Candida clinical isolates determined by Etest. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2006 Aug; 39(4): 335–41PubMed Chiu YS, Chang SC, Hsueh PR, et al. Survey of amphotericin B susceptibility of Candida clinical isolates determined by Etest. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2006 Aug; 39(4): 335–41PubMed
25.
go back to reference Diekema DJ, Messer SA, Hollis RJ, et al. Activities of caspofungin, itraconazole, posaconazole, ravuconazole, voriconazole, and amphotericin B against 448 recent clinical isolates of filamentous fungi. J Clin Microbiol 2003 Aug; 41(8): 3623–6PubMedCrossRef Diekema DJ, Messer SA, Hollis RJ, et al. Activities of caspofungin, itraconazole, posaconazole, ravuconazole, voriconazole, and amphotericin B against 448 recent clinical isolates of filamentous fungi. J Clin Microbiol 2003 Aug; 41(8): 3623–6PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Espinel-Ingroff A, Johnson E, Hockey H, et al. Activities of voriconazole, itraconazole and amphotericin B in vitro against 590 moulds from 323 patients in the voriconazole phase III clinical studies. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008 Mar; 61(3): 616–20PubMedCrossRef Espinel-Ingroff A, Johnson E, Hockey H, et al. Activities of voriconazole, itraconazole and amphotericin B in vitro against 590 moulds from 323 patients in the voriconazole phase III clinical studies. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008 Mar; 61(3): 616–20PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Vitale RG, Meis JF, Mouton JW, et al. Evaluation of the post-antifungal effect (PAFE) of amphotericin B and nystatin against 30 zygomycetes using two different media. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003 Jul; 52(1): 65–70PubMedCrossRef Vitale RG, Meis JF, Mouton JW, et al. Evaluation of the post-antifungal effect (PAFE) of amphotericin B and nystatin against 30 zygomycetes using two different media. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003 Jul; 52(1): 65–70PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Di Bonaventura G, Spedicato I, Picciani C, et al. In vitro pharmacodynamic characteristics of amphotericin B, caspofungin, fluconazole, and voriconazole against bloodstream isolates of infrequent Candida species from patients with hematologic malignancies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004 Nov; 48(11): 4453–6PubMedCrossRef Di Bonaventura G, Spedicato I, Picciani C, et al. In vitro pharmacodynamic characteristics of amphotericin B, caspofungin, fluconazole, and voriconazole against bloodstream isolates of infrequent Candida species from patients with hematologic malignancies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004 Nov; 48(11): 4453–6PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Philip A, Odabasi Z, Rodriguez J, et al. In vitro synergy testing of anidulafungin with itraconazole, voriconazole, and amphotericin B against Aspergillus spp. and Fusarium spp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005 Aug; 49(8): 3572–4CrossRef Philip A, Odabasi Z, Rodriguez J, et al. In vitro synergy testing of anidulafungin with itraconazole, voriconazole, and amphotericin B against Aspergillus spp. and Fusarium spp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005 Aug; 49(8): 3572–4CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Arikan S, Lozano-Chiu M, Paetznick V, et al. In vitro synergy of caspofungin and amphotericin B against Aspergillus and Fusarium spp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Jan; 46(1): 245–7PubMedCrossRef Arikan S, Lozano-Chiu M, Paetznick V, et al. In vitro synergy of caspofungin and amphotericin B against Aspergillus and Fusarium spp. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Jan; 46(1): 245–7PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Kuhn DM, George T, Chandra J, et al. Antifungal susceptibility of Candida biofilms: unique efficacy of amphotericin B lipid formulations and echinocandins. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Jun; 46(6): 1773–80PubMedCrossRef Kuhn DM, George T, Chandra J, et al. Antifungal susceptibility of Candida biofilms: unique efficacy of amphotericin B lipid formulations and echinocandins. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Jun; 46(6): 1773–80PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Zarif L, Graybill JR, Perlin D, et al. Antifungal activity of amphotericin B cochleates against Candida albicans infection in a mouse model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000 Jun; 44(6): 1463–9PubMedCrossRef Zarif L, Graybill JR, Perlin D, et al. Antifungal activity of amphotericin B cochleates against Candida albicans infection in a mouse model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000 Jun; 44(6): 1463–9PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference van Etten EW, Snijders SV, van Vianen W, et al. Superior efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B with prolonged circulation in blood in the treatment of severe candidiasis in leukopenic mice. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998 Sep; 42(9): 2431–3PubMed van Etten EW, Snijders SV, van Vianen W, et al. Superior efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B with prolonged circulation in blood in the treatment of severe candidiasis in leukopenic mice. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998 Sep; 42(9): 2431–3PubMed
34.
go back to reference Clemons KV, Espiritu M, Parmar R, et al. Comparative efficacies of conventional amphotericin B, liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome), caspofungin, micafungin, and voriconazole alone and in combination against experimental murine central nervous system aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005 Dec; 49(12): 4867–75PubMedCrossRef Clemons KV, Espiritu M, Parmar R, et al. Comparative efficacies of conventional amphotericin B, liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome), caspofungin, micafungin, and voriconazole alone and in combination against experimental murine central nervous system aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005 Dec; 49(12): 4867–75PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Clemons KV, Stevens DA. Comparative efficacies of four amphotericin B formulations-Fungizone, Amphotec (Amphocil), AmBisome, and Abelcet-against systemic murine aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004 Mar; 48(3): 1047–50PubMedCrossRef Clemons KV, Stevens DA. Comparative efficacies of four amphotericin B formulations-Fungizone, Amphotec (Amphocil), AmBisome, and Abelcet-against systemic murine aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004 Mar; 48(3): 1047–50PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Takemoto K, Yamamoto Y, Ueda Y, et al. Comparative study on the efficacy of AmBisome and Fungizone in a mouse model of pulmonary aspergillosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006 Apr; 57(4): 724–31PubMedCrossRef Takemoto K, Yamamoto Y, Ueda Y, et al. Comparative study on the efficacy of AmBisome and Fungizone in a mouse model of pulmonary aspergillosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006 Apr; 57(4): 724–31PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Olson JA, Adler-Moore JP, Schwartz J, et al. Comparative efficacies, toxicities, and tissue concentrations of amphotericin B lipid formulations in a murine pulmonary aspergillosis model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006 Jun; 50(6): 2122–31PubMedCrossRef Olson JA, Adler-Moore JP, Schwartz J, et al. Comparative efficacies, toxicities, and tissue concentrations of amphotericin B lipid formulations in a murine pulmonary aspergillosis model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006 Jun; 50(6): 2122–31PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Lewis RE, Liao G, Hou J, et al. Comparative analysis of amphotericin B lipid complex and liposomal amphotericin B kinetics of lung accumulation and fungal clearance in a murine model of acute invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007 Apr; 51(4): 1253–8PubMedCrossRef Lewis RE, Liao G, Hou J, et al. Comparative analysis of amphotericin B lipid complex and liposomal amphotericin B kinetics of lung accumulation and fungal clearance in a murine model of acute invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007 Apr; 51(4): 1253–8PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Van Etten EW, Stearne-Cullen LE, ten Kate M, et al. Efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B with prolonged circulation in blood in treatment of severe pulmonary aspergillosis in leukopenic rats. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000 Mar; 44(3): 540–5PubMedCrossRef Van Etten EW, Stearne-Cullen LE, ten Kate M, et al. Efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B with prolonged circulation in blood in treatment of severe pulmonary aspergillosis in leukopenic rats. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000 Mar; 44(3): 540–5PubMedCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Gavalda` J, Martin T, López P, et al. Efficacy of high loading doses of liposomal amphotericin B in the treatment of experimental invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Clin Microbiol Infect 2005 Dec; 11(12): 999–1004PubMedCrossRef Gavalda` J, Martin T, López P, et al. Efficacy of high loading doses of liposomal amphotericin B in the treatment of experimental invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Clin Microbiol Infect 2005 Dec; 11(12): 999–1004PubMedCrossRef
41.
go back to reference Martín MT, Gavaldà J, López P, et al. Efficacy of high doses of liposomal amphotericin B in the treatment of experimental aspergillosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003 Dec; 52(6): 1032–4PubMedCrossRef Martín MT, Gavaldà J, López P, et al. Efficacy of high doses of liposomal amphotericin B in the treatment of experimental aspergillosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003 Dec; 52(6): 1032–4PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Takemoto K, Yamamoto Y, Ueda Y, et al. Comparative studies on the efficacy of AmBisome and Fungizone in a mouse model of disseminated aspergillosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004 Feb; 53(2): 311–7PubMedCrossRef Takemoto K, Yamamoto Y, Ueda Y, et al. Comparative studies on the efficacy of AmBisome and Fungizone in a mouse model of disseminated aspergillosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004 Feb; 53(2): 311–7PubMedCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Ortoneda M, Capilla J, Pastor FJ, et al. Efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B in treatment of systemic murine fusariosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Jul; 46(7): 2273–5PubMedCrossRef Ortoneda M, Capilla J, Pastor FJ, et al. Efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B in treatment of systemic murine fusariosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Jul; 46(7): 2273–5PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Ibrahim AS, Gebremariam T, Husseiny MI, et al. Comparison of lipid amphotericin B preparations in treating murine zygomycosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008 Apr; 52(4): 1573–6PubMedCrossRef Ibrahim AS, Gebremariam T, Husseiny MI, et al. Comparison of lipid amphotericin B preparations in treating murine zygomycosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008 Apr; 52(4): 1573–6PubMedCrossRef
45.
go back to reference Andes D, Safdar N, Marchillo K, et al. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic comparison of amphotericin B (AMB) and two lipid-associated AMB preparations, liposomal AMB and AMB lipid complex, in murine candidiasis models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006 Feb; 50(2): 674–84PubMedCrossRef Andes D, Safdar N, Marchillo K, et al. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic comparison of amphotericin B (AMB) and two lipid-associated AMB preparations, liposomal AMB and AMB lipid complex, in murine candidiasis models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006 Feb; 50(2): 674–84PubMedCrossRef
46.
go back to reference Groll AH, Giri N, Petraitis V, et al. Comparative efficacy and distribution of lipid formulations of amphotericin B in experimental Candida albicans infection of the central nervous system. J Infect Dis 2000 Jul; 182(1): 274–82PubMedCrossRef Groll AH, Giri N, Petraitis V, et al. Comparative efficacy and distribution of lipid formulations of amphotericin B in experimental Candida albicans infection of the central nervous system. J Infect Dis 2000 Jul; 182(1): 274–82PubMedCrossRef
47.
go back to reference Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Epidemiology of invasive candidiasis: a persistent public health problem. Clin Microbiol Rev 2007; 20(1): 133–63PubMedCrossRef Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Epidemiology of invasive candidiasis: a persistent public health problem. Clin Microbiol Rev 2007; 20(1): 133–63PubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference Barker KS, Crisp S, Wiederhold N, et al. Genome-wide expression profiling reveals genes associated with amphotericin B and fluconazole reistance in experimentally induced antifungal resistant isolates of Candida albicans. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 54: 376–85PubMedCrossRef Barker KS, Crisp S, Wiederhold N, et al. Genome-wide expression profiling reveals genes associated with amphotericin B and fluconazole reistance in experimentally induced antifungal resistant isolates of Candida albicans. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 54: 376–85PubMedCrossRef
49.
go back to reference Blum G, Perkhofer S, Haas H, et al. Potential basis for amphotericin B resistance in Aspergillus terreus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008 Apr; 52(4): 1553–5PubMedCrossRef Blum G, Perkhofer S, Haas H, et al. Potential basis for amphotericin B resistance in Aspergillus terreus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008 Apr; 52(4): 1553–5PubMedCrossRef
50.
go back to reference Ben-Ami R, Lewis RE, Kontoyiannis DP. Immunopharmacology of modern antifungals. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47: 226–35PubMedCrossRef Ben-Ami R, Lewis RE, Kontoyiannis DP. Immunopharmacology of modern antifungals. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47: 226–35PubMedCrossRef
51.
go back to reference Simitsopoulou M, Roilides E, Dotis J, et al. Differential expression of cytokines and chemokines in human monocytes induced by lipid formulations of amphotericin B. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005 Apr; 49(4): 1397–403PubMedCrossRef Simitsopoulou M, Roilides E, Dotis J, et al. Differential expression of cytokines and chemokines in human monocytes induced by lipid formulations of amphotericin B. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005 Apr; 49(4): 1397–403PubMedCrossRef
52.
go back to reference Bellocchio S, Gaziano R, Bozza S, et al. Liposomal amphotericin B activates antifungal resistance with reduced toxicity by diverting Toll-like receptor signalling from TLR-2 to TLR-4. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005 Feb; 55(2): 214–22PubMedCrossRef Bellocchio S, Gaziano R, Bozza S, et al. Liposomal amphotericin B activates antifungal resistance with reduced toxicity by diverting Toll-like receptor signalling from TLR-2 to TLR-4. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005 Feb; 55(2): 214–22PubMedCrossRef
53.
go back to reference Pachl J, Svoboda P, Jacobs F, et al. A randomized, blinded, multicenter trial of lipid-associated amphotericin B alone versus in combination with an antibody-based inhibitor of heat shock protein 90 in patients with invasive candidiasis. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 42: 1404–6PubMedCrossRef Pachl J, Svoboda P, Jacobs F, et al. A randomized, blinded, multicenter trial of lipid-associated amphotericin B alone versus in combination with an antibody-based inhibitor of heat shock protein 90 in patients with invasive candidiasis. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 42: 1404–6PubMedCrossRef
54.
go back to reference Dotis J, Simitsopoulou M, Dalakiouridou M, et al. Amphotericin B formulations variably enhance antifungal activity of human neutrophils and monocytes against Fusarium solani: comparison with Aspergillus fumigatus. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008 Apr; 61(4): 810–7PubMedCrossRef Dotis J, Simitsopoulou M, Dalakiouridou M, et al. Amphotericin B formulations variably enhance antifungal activity of human neutrophils and monocytes against Fusarium solani: comparison with Aspergillus fumigatus. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008 Apr; 61(4): 810–7PubMedCrossRef
55.
go back to reference Roilides E, Lyman CA, Filioti J, et al. Amphotericin B formulations exert additive antifungal activity in combination with pulmonary alveolar macrophages and polymorphonuclear leukocytes against Aspergillus fumigatus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Jun; 46(6): 1974–6PubMedCrossRef Roilides E, Lyman CA, Filioti J, et al. Amphotericin B formulations exert additive antifungal activity in combination with pulmonary alveolar macrophages and polymorphonuclear leukocytes against Aspergillus fumigatus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Jun; 46(6): 1974–6PubMedCrossRef
56.
go back to reference Dotis J, Simitsopoulou M, Dalakiouridou M, et al. Effects of lipid formulations of amphotericin B on activity of human monocytes against Aspergillus fumigatus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006 Mar; 50(3): 868–73PubMedCrossRef Dotis J, Simitsopoulou M, Dalakiouridou M, et al. Effects of lipid formulations of amphotericin B on activity of human monocytes against Aspergillus fumigatus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006 Mar; 50(3): 868–73PubMedCrossRef
57.
go back to reference Walsh TJ, Yeldandi V, McEvoy M, et al. Safety, tolerance, and pharmacokinetics of a small unilamellar liposomal formulation of amphotericin B (AmBisome) in neutropenic patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998 Sep; 42(9): 2391–8PubMed Walsh TJ, Yeldandi V, McEvoy M, et al. Safety, tolerance, and pharmacokinetics of a small unilamellar liposomal formulation of amphotericin B (AmBisome) in neutropenic patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998 Sep; 42(9): 2391–8PubMed
58.
go back to reference Vogelsinger H, Weiler S, Djanani A, et al. Amphotericin B tissue distribution in autopsy material after treatment with liposomal amphotericin B and amphotericin B colloidal dispersion. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006 Jun; 57(6): 1153–60PubMedCrossRef Vogelsinger H, Weiler S, Djanani A, et al. Amphotericin B tissue distribution in autopsy material after treatment with liposomal amphotericin B and amphotericin B colloidal dispersion. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006 Jun; 57(6): 1153–60PubMedCrossRef
59.
go back to reference Groll AH, Mickiene D, Piscitelli SC, et al. Distribution of lipid formulations of amphotericin B into bone marrow and fat tissue in rabbits. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000 Feb; 44(2): 408–10PubMedCrossRef Groll AH, Mickiene D, Piscitelli SC, et al. Distribution of lipid formulations of amphotericin B into bone marrow and fat tissue in rabbits. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000 Feb; 44(2): 408–10PubMedCrossRef
60.
go back to reference Adler-Moore J, Proffitt RT. Effect of tissue penetration on AmBisome efficacy. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2003 Feb; 4(2): 179–85PubMed Adler-Moore J, Proffitt RT. Effect of tissue penetration on AmBisome efficacy. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2003 Feb; 4(2): 179–85PubMed
61.
go back to reference Bellmann R. Clinical pharmacokinetics of systemically administered antimycotics. Curr Clin Pharmacol 2007 Jan; 2(1): 37–58PubMedCrossRef Bellmann R. Clinical pharmacokinetics of systemically administered antimycotics. Curr Clin Pharmacol 2007 Jan; 2(1): 37–58PubMedCrossRef
62.
go back to reference Bekersky I, Fielding RM, Dressler DE, et al. Plasma protein binding of amphotericin B and pharmacokinetics of bound versus unbound amphotericin B after administration of intravenous liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) and amphotericin B deoxycholate. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Mar; 46(3): 834–40PubMedCrossRef Bekersky I, Fielding RM, Dressler DE, et al. Plasma protein binding of amphotericin B and pharmacokinetics of bound versus unbound amphotericin B after administration of intravenous liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) and amphotericin B deoxycholate. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002 Mar; 46(3): 834–40PubMedCrossRef
63.
go back to reference Walsh TJ, Pappas P, Winston DJ, et al. Voriconazole compared with liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in patients with neutropenia and persistent fever. N Engl J Med 2002 Jan 24; 346(4): 225–34PubMedCrossRef Walsh TJ, Pappas P, Winston DJ, et al. Voriconazole compared with liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in patients with neutropenia and persistent fever. N Engl J Med 2002 Jan 24; 346(4): 225–34PubMedCrossRef
64.
go back to reference Cornely OA, Maertens J, Bresnik M, et al. Liposomal amphotericin B as initial therapy for invasive mold infection: a randomized trial comparing a high-loading dose regimen with standard dosing (AmBiLoad trial). Clin Infect Dis 2007 May 15; 44(10): 1289–97PubMedCrossRef Cornely OA, Maertens J, Bresnik M, et al. Liposomal amphotericin B as initial therapy for invasive mold infection: a randomized trial comparing a high-loading dose regimen with standard dosing (AmBiLoad trial). Clin Infect Dis 2007 May 15; 44(10): 1289–97PubMedCrossRef
65.
go back to reference Walsh TJ, Finberg RW, Arndt C, et al. Liposomal amphotericin B for empirical therapy in patients with persistent fever and neutropenia. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999 Mar 11; 340(10): 764–71 Walsh TJ, Finberg RW, Arndt C, et al. Liposomal amphotericin B for empirical therapy in patients with persistent fever and neutropenia. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999 Mar 11; 340(10): 764–71
66.
go back to reference Wingard JR, White MH, Anaissie E, et al. A randomized, double-blind comparative trial evaluating the safety of liposomal amphotericin B versus amphotericin B lipid complex in the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia. L Amph/ABLC Collaborative Study Group. Clin Infect Dis 2000 Nov; 31(5): 1155–63 Wingard JR, White MH, Anaissie E, et al. A randomized, double-blind comparative trial evaluating the safety of liposomal amphotericin B versus amphotericin B lipid complex in the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia. L Amph/ABLC Collaborative Study Group. Clin Infect Dis 2000 Nov; 31(5): 1155–63
67.
go back to reference Walsh TJ, Teppler H, Donowitz GR, et al. Caspofungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in patients with persistent fever and neutropenia. N Engl J Med 2004 Sep 30; 351(14): 1391–402PubMedCrossRef Walsh TJ, Teppler H, Donowitz GR, et al. Caspofungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in patients with persistent fever and neutropenia. N Engl J Med 2004 Sep 30; 351(14): 1391–402PubMedCrossRef
68.
go back to reference Johnson PC, Wheat LJ, Cloud GA, et al. Safety and efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B compared with conventional amphotericin B for induction therapy of histoplasmosis in patients with AIDS. Ann Intern Med 2002 Jul 16; 137(2): 105–9PubMed Johnson PC, Wheat LJ, Cloud GA, et al. Safety and efficacy of liposomal amphotericin B compared with conventional amphotericin B for induction therapy of histoplasmosis in patients with AIDS. Ann Intern Med 2002 Jul 16; 137(2): 105–9PubMed
69.
go back to reference Kuse ER, Chetchotisakd P, da Cunha CA, et al. Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for candidaemia and invasive candidosis: a phase III randomised double-blind trial. Lancet 2007 May 5; 369(9572): 1519–27PubMedCrossRef Kuse ER, Chetchotisakd P, da Cunha CA, et al. Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for candidaemia and invasive candidosis: a phase III randomised double-blind trial. Lancet 2007 May 5; 369(9572): 1519–27PubMedCrossRef
70.
go back to reference Queiroz-Telles F, Berezin E, Leverger G, et al. Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for pediatric patients with invasive candidiasis: substudy of a randomized double-blind trial. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008 Sep; 27(9): 820–6PubMedCrossRef Queiroz-Telles F, Berezin E, Leverger G, et al. Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for pediatric patients with invasive candidiasis: substudy of a randomized double-blind trial. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008 Sep; 27(9): 820–6PubMedCrossRef
71.
go back to reference Hamill RJ, Sobel J, El-Sadr W, et al. Randomized doubleblind trial of AmBisome (liposomal amphotericin B) and amphotericin B in acute cryptococcal meningitis in AIDS patients [abstract no. 1161]. 39th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1999 Sep 26–29; San Francisco (CA) Hamill RJ, Sobel J, El-Sadr W, et al. Randomized doubleblind trial of AmBisome (liposomal amphotericin B) and amphotericin B in acute cryptococcal meningitis in AIDS patients [abstract no. 1161]. 39th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 1999 Sep 26–29; San Francisco (CA)
73.
go back to reference Goldman RD, Koren G. Amphotericin B nephrotoxicity in children. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2004 Jul; 26(7): 421–6PubMedCrossRef Goldman RD, Koren G. Amphotericin B nephrotoxicity in children. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2004 Jul; 26(7): 421–6PubMedCrossRef
74.
go back to reference Dupont B. Overview of the lipid formulations of amphotericin B. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002 Feb; 49 Suppl. 1: 31–6CrossRef Dupont B. Overview of the lipid formulations of amphotericin B. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002 Feb; 49 Suppl. 1: 31–6CrossRef
75.
go back to reference Gilead Sciences. Optimising treatment with amphotericin B: importance of correct dosing for patients receiving amphotericin B products. Gilead Sciences, 2008 Jul. (Data on file) Gilead Sciences. Optimising treatment with amphotericin B: importance of correct dosing for patients receiving amphotericin B products. Gilead Sciences, 2008 Jul. (Data on file)
76.
go back to reference Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes D, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2009 Mar 1; 48(5): 503–35PubMedCrossRef Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes D, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2009 Mar 1; 48(5): 503–35PubMedCrossRef
77.
go back to reference Denning DW, Kibbler CC, Barnes RA. British Society for Medical Mycology proposed standards of care for patients with invasive fungal infections. Lancet Infect Dis 2003 Apr; 3(4): 230–40PubMedCrossRef Denning DW, Kibbler CC, Barnes RA. British Society for Medical Mycology proposed standards of care for patients with invasive fungal infections. Lancet Infect Dis 2003 Apr; 3(4): 230–40PubMedCrossRef
78.
go back to reference Saag MS, Graybill RJ, Larsen RA, et al. Practice guidelines for the management of cryptococcal disease. Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2000 Apr; 30(4): 710–8CrossRef Saag MS, Graybill RJ, Larsen RA, et al. Practice guidelines for the management of cryptococcal disease. Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2000 Apr; 30(4): 710–8CrossRef
79.
go back to reference Herbrecht R, Flückiger U, Gachot B, et al. Treatment of invasive Candida and invasive Aspergillus infections in adult haematological patients. Eur J Cancer Suppl 2007; 5(2): 49–59CrossRef Herbrecht R, Flückiger U, Gachot B, et al. Treatment of invasive Candida and invasive Aspergillus infections in adult haematological patients. Eur J Cancer Suppl 2007; 5(2): 49–59CrossRef
80.
go back to reference Wingard JR. Empirical antifungal therapy in treating febrile neutropenic patients. Clin Infect Dis 2004 Jul 15; 39 Suppl. 1: S38–43PubMedCrossRef Wingard JR. Empirical antifungal therapy in treating febrile neutropenic patients. Clin Infect Dis 2004 Jul 15; 39 Suppl. 1: S38–43PubMedCrossRef
82.
go back to reference Rüping MJ, Vehreschild JJ, Cornely OA. Patients at high risk of invasive fungal infections: when and how to treat. Drugs 2008; 68(14): 1941–62PubMedCrossRef Rüping MJ, Vehreschild JJ, Cornely OA. Patients at high risk of invasive fungal infections: when and how to treat. Drugs 2008; 68(14): 1941–62PubMedCrossRef
83.
go back to reference Rüping MJ, Vehreschild JJ, Cornely OA. Antifungal treatment strategies in high risk patients. Mycoses 2008 Sep; 51 Suppl. 2: 46–51CrossRef Rüping MJ, Vehreschild JJ, Cornely OA. Antifungal treatment strategies in high risk patients. Mycoses 2008 Sep; 51 Suppl. 2: 46–51CrossRef
84.
go back to reference Walsh TJ, Anaissie EJ, Denning DW, et al. Treatment of aspergillosis: clinical practice guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2008 Feb 1; 46(3): 327–60PubMedCrossRef Walsh TJ, Anaissie EJ, Denning DW, et al. Treatment of aspergillosis: clinical practice guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2008 Feb 1; 46(3): 327–60PubMedCrossRef
85.
go back to reference Wheat J, Sarosi G, McKinsey D, et al. Practice guidelines for the management of patients with histoplasmosis. Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2000 Apr; 30(4): 688–95CrossRef Wheat J, Sarosi G, McKinsey D, et al. Practice guidelines for the management of patients with histoplasmosis. Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2000 Apr; 30(4): 688–95CrossRef
86.
go back to reference Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC, Johansen HK. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B in cancer patients with neutropenia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006 Jan 25; (1): CD004707 Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC, Johansen HK. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B in cancer patients with neutropenia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006 Jan 25; (1): CD004707
87.
go back to reference Powers JH, Dixon CA, Goldberger MJ. Voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B in patients with neutropenia and persistent fever [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 Jan 24; 346(4): 289–90PubMedCrossRef Powers JH, Dixon CA, Goldberger MJ. Voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B in patients with neutropenia and persistent fever [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 Jan 24; 346(4): 289–90PubMedCrossRef
88.
go back to reference Johnson JR. Voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 30; 346(22): 1745–7; author reply 1745-7PubMedCrossRef Johnson JR. Voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 30; 346(22): 1745–7; author reply 1745-7PubMedCrossRef
89.
go back to reference Ullmann AJ, Heussel CP, Cornely OA. Voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 30; 346(22): 1745–7; author reply 1745-7PubMedCrossRef Ullmann AJ, Heussel CP, Cornely OA. Voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 30; 346(22): 1745–7; author reply 1745-7PubMedCrossRef
90.
go back to reference Walsh TJ, Lee J, Dismukes WE. Decisions about voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 9; 346 (19): 1499; author reply 1499 Walsh TJ, Lee J, Dismukes WE. Decisions about voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 9; 346 (19): 1499; author reply 1499
91.
go back to reference Powers JH, Dixon CA, Goldberger M. Decisions about voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 9; 346(19): 1499CrossRef Powers JH, Dixon CA, Goldberger M. Decisions about voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 9; 346(19): 1499CrossRef
92.
go back to reference Bennett JE, Powers J, Walsh T, et al. Forum report: issues in clinical trials of empirical antifungal therapy in treating febrile neutropenic patients. Clin Infect Dis 2003 Apr 15; 36 Suppl. 3: S117–22PubMedCrossRef Bennett JE, Powers J, Walsh T, et al. Forum report: issues in clinical trials of empirical antifungal therapy in treating febrile neutropenic patients. Clin Infect Dis 2003 Apr 15; 36 Suppl. 3: S117–22PubMedCrossRef
93.
go back to reference de Pauw BE, Sable CA, Walsh TJ, et al. Impact of alternate definitions of fever resolution on the composite endpoint in clinical trials of empirical antifungal therapy for neutropenic patients with persistent fever: analysis of results from the Caspofungin Empirical Therapy Study. Transpl Infect Dis 2006 Mar; 8(1): 31–7PubMedCrossRef de Pauw BE, Sable CA, Walsh TJ, et al. Impact of alternate definitions of fever resolution on the composite endpoint in clinical trials of empirical antifungal therapy for neutropenic patients with persistent fever: analysis of results from the Caspofungin Empirical Therapy Study. Transpl Infect Dis 2006 Mar; 8(1): 31–7PubMedCrossRef
94.
go back to reference Walsh TJ, Pappas PG, Winston DJ. Voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 30; 346(22): 1746–7 Walsh TJ, Pappas PG, Winston DJ. Voriconazole versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 May 30; 346(22): 1746–7
96.
go back to reference Herbrecht R, Denning DW, Patterson TF, et al. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for primary therapy of invasive aspergillosis. N Engl J Med 2002 Aug 8; 347(6): 408–15PubMedCrossRef Herbrecht R, Denning DW, Patterson TF, et al. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for primary therapy of invasive aspergillosis. N Engl J Med 2002 Aug 8; 347(6): 408–15PubMedCrossRef
97.
go back to reference Blot F, Edé C, Nitenberg GM. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for invasive aspergillosis [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 Dec 19; 347(25): 2080–1; author reply 2080-1PubMedCrossRef Blot F, Edé C, Nitenberg GM. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for invasive aspergillosis [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 Dec 19; 347(25): 2080–1; author reply 2080-1PubMedCrossRef
98.
go back to reference Karthaus M. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for invasive aspergillosis [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 Dec 19; 347(25): 2080–1; author reply 2080-1PubMedCrossRef Karthaus M. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for invasive aspergillosis [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 Dec 19; 347(25): 2080–1; author reply 2080-1PubMedCrossRef
99.
go back to reference Herbrecht R, Patterson TF, Bennett JE. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for invasive aspergillosis [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 Dec 19; 347(25): 2080–1CrossRef Herbrecht R, Patterson TF, Bennett JE. Voriconazole versus amphotericin B for invasive aspergillosis [letter]. N Engl J Med 2002 Dec 19; 347(25): 2080–1CrossRef
100.
go back to reference Agarwal R, Singh N. Amphotericin B is still the drug of choice for invasive aspergillosis [letter]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006 Jul 1; 174(1): 102; author reply 102-3PubMed Agarwal R, Singh N. Amphotericin B is still the drug of choice for invasive aspergillosis [letter]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006 Jul 1; 174(1): 102; author reply 102-3PubMed
101.
go back to reference Denning DW. Comparison of 2 studies of treatment of invasive aspergillosis [letter]. Clin Infect Dis 2007 Oct 15; 45(8): 1106–8; author reply 1108-10PubMedCrossRef Denning DW. Comparison of 2 studies of treatment of invasive aspergillosis [letter]. Clin Infect Dis 2007 Oct 15; 45(8): 1106–8; author reply 1108-10PubMedCrossRef
102.
go back to reference White MH, Bowden RA, Sandler ES, et al. Randomized, double-blind clinical trial of amphotericin B colloidal dispersion vs. amphotericin B in the empirical treatment of fever and neutropenia. Clin Infect Dis 1998 Aug; 27(2): 296–302 White MH, Bowden RA, Sandler ES, et al. Randomized, double-blind clinical trial of amphotericin B colloidal dispersion vs. amphotericin B in the empirical treatment of fever and neutropenia. Clin Infect Dis 1998 Aug; 27(2): 296–302
103.
go back to reference Bowden R, Chandrasekar P, White MH, et al. A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of amphotericin B colloidal dispersion versus amphotericin B for treatment of invasive aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients. Clin Infect Dis 2002 Aug 15; 35(4): 359–66PubMedCrossRef Bowden R, Chandrasekar P, White MH, et al. A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of amphotericin B colloidal dispersion versus amphotericin B for treatment of invasive aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients. Clin Infect Dis 2002 Aug 15; 35(4): 359–66PubMedCrossRef
104.
go back to reference Rogers TR. Treatment of zygomycosis: current and new options. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008 Jan; 61 Suppl. 1: i35–9PubMedCrossRef Rogers TR. Treatment of zygomycosis: current and new options. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008 Jan; 61 Suppl. 1: i35–9PubMedCrossRef
105.
go back to reference Cross SA, Scott LJ. Micafungin: a review of its use in adults for the treatment of invasive and oesophageal candidiasis, and as prophylaxis against Candida infections. Drugs 2008; 68(15): 2225–55PubMedCrossRef Cross SA, Scott LJ. Micafungin: a review of its use in adults for the treatment of invasive and oesophageal candidiasis, and as prophylaxis against Candida infections. Drugs 2008; 68(15): 2225–55PubMedCrossRef
106.
go back to reference Scott LJ, Simpson D. Voriconazole: a review of its use in the management of invasive fungal infections. Drugs 2007; 67(2): 269–98PubMedCrossRef Scott LJ, Simpson D. Voriconazole: a review of its use in the management of invasive fungal infections. Drugs 2007; 67(2): 269–98PubMedCrossRef
107.
go back to reference McCormack PL, Perry CM. Caspofungin: a review of its use in the treatment of fungal infections. Drugs 2005; 65(14): 2049–68PubMedCrossRef McCormack PL, Perry CM. Caspofungin: a review of its use in the treatment of fungal infections. Drugs 2005; 65(14): 2049–68PubMedCrossRef
112.
go back to reference Almirante B, Rodríguez D. Antifungal agents in neonates: issues and recommendations. Paediatr Drugs 2007; 9(5): 311–21PubMedCrossRef Almirante B, Rodríguez D. Antifungal agents in neonates: issues and recommendations. Paediatr Drugs 2007; 9(5): 311–21PubMedCrossRef
113.
go back to reference Leibovitz E. Neonatal candidosis: clinical picture, management controversies and consensus, and new therapeutic options. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002 Feb; 49 Suppl. 1: 69–73CrossRef Leibovitz E. Neonatal candidosis: clinical picture, management controversies and consensus, and new therapeutic options. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002 Feb; 49 Suppl. 1: 69–73CrossRef
114.
go back to reference Frattarelli DA, Reed MD, Giacoia GP, et al. Antifungals in systemic neonatal candidiasis. Drugs 2004; 64(9): 949–68PubMedCrossRef Frattarelli DA, Reed MD, Giacoia GP, et al. Antifungals in systemic neonatal candidiasis. Drugs 2004; 64(9): 949–68PubMedCrossRef
115.
go back to reference Kaskel P, Tuschy S, Wagner A, et al. Economic evaluation of caspofungin vs liposomal amphotericin B for empirical therapy of suspected systemic fungal infection in the German hospital setting. Ann Hematol 2008 Apr; 87(4): 311–9PubMedCrossRef Kaskel P, Tuschy S, Wagner A, et al. Economic evaluation of caspofungin vs liposomal amphotericin B for empirical therapy of suspected systemic fungal infection in the German hospital setting. Ann Hematol 2008 Apr; 87(4): 311–9PubMedCrossRef
116.
go back to reference Bruynesteyn K, Gant V, McKenzie C, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of caspofungin vs. liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of suspected fungal infections in the UK. Eur J Haematol 2007 Jun; 78(6): 532–9 Bruynesteyn K, Gant V, McKenzie C, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of caspofungin vs. liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of suspected fungal infections in the UK. Eur J Haematol 2007 Jun; 78(6): 532–9
117.
go back to reference Cornely OA, Sidhu M, Odeyemi I, et al. Economic analysis of micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidiasis in Germany. Curr Med Res Opin 2008 May 9; 24(6): 1743–53PubMedCrossRef Cornely OA, Sidhu M, Odeyemi I, et al. Economic analysis of micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidiasis in Germany. Curr Med Res Opin 2008 May 9; 24(6): 1743–53PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Liposomal Amphotericin B
A Review of its Use as Empirical Therapy in Febrile Neutropenia and in the Treatment of Invasive Fungal Infections
Authors
Marit D. Moen
Katherine A. Lyseng-Williamson
Lesley J. Scott
Publication date
01-02-2009
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Drugs / Issue 3/2009
Print ISSN: 0012-6667
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1950
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200969030-00010

Other articles of this Issue 3/2009

Drugs 3/2009 Go to the issue

Adis Drug Profile

Transdermal Oxybutynin

Adis Drug Evaluation

Sertaconazole

Adis Drug Profile

Plerixafor

Therapy in Practice

Uraemic Pruritus