Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Shyam Sundar a Kala-Azar Medical Research Centre, Banaras Hindu
University, Department of Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences,
Varanasi-211005, India, b Department of Medicine, Weill Medical College of Cornell
University, New York NY 10021, USA Correspondence to: S Sundar
shyams_vns{at}satyam.net.in
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective:
To test short course, low dose liposomal
amphotericin B as single or daily infusion treatment in Indian visceral
leishmaniasis (kala-azar).
Design:
Randomised, open label study.
Setting:
Inpatient unit for leishmaniasis in Bihar, India.
Participants:
91 adults and children with splenic
aspirate positive for infection.
Interventions:
Total dose of 5 mg/kg of liposomal
amphotericin B given as a single infusion (n=46) or as once daily
infusions of 1 mg/kg for five days (n=45).
Main outcome measures:
Clinical and parasitological
cure assessed 14 days after treatment and long term definitive cure
(healthy, no relapse) at six months.
Results:
All but one person in each group had an
initial apparent cure. During six months of follow up, three patients in the single dose group and two in the five dose group relapsed. Complete response (definitive cure) was therefore achieved in 84 of 91 subjects (92%): 42 of 46 patients in the single dose group (91%, 95%
confidence interval 79% to 98%) and 42 of 45 in the five dose group
(93%, 82% to 99%). Response rates in the two groups were not
significantly different.
Conclusion:
Low dose liposomal amphotericin B (5 mg/kg), given either as a five day course or as a single infusion,
seems to be effective for visceral leishmaniasis and warrants further testing.
|
What is already known on this topic
What this study adds
|
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Up to half of the world's cases of visceral leishmaniasis (kala-azar) occur in India, and about 90% of Indian patients live in the state of Bihar. 1 2 In the past five years, pentavalent antimony has become ineffective for treating visceral leishmaniasis in Bihar and other drugs have to be used. 3 4 Alternative effective treatments include oral miltefosine for 28 days (now completing phase III testing), 4 5 daily injections of aminosidine for 21 days,6 infusions of conventional amphotericin B given daily for 20 days or on alternate days for 30 days, 4 7 and short courses of infusions of a lipid formulation of amphotericin B. 4 8-12 Although these treatments have a cure rate of over 90%, the drugs are still under evaluation and either have a prolonged or difficult to tolerate regimen or are prohibitively expensive.4
Recently, we tested low dose liposomal amphotericin B in Indian patients in Bihar in whom antimony had failed.13 A short course, five day treatment regimen consisting of 0.75 or 1.5 mg/kg/day (total doses 3.75 and 7.5 mg/kg) induced long term cure in 89% and 93% of patients, respectively. Increasing the dose to 3 mg/kg/day (total dose 15 mg/kg), which is in the range used in most previous trials,10-12 gave a 97% cure rate.13
We conducted a pilot study to determine whether our five day regimen
could be abbreviated further. Patients were treated with a low total
dose (5 mg/kg), which was divided and administered over five days or
given as a single infusion.
| |
Participants and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Entry and exclusion criteria
This open label study was carried out at the Kala-Azar Medical
Research Centre in Muzaffarpur, Bihar, where visceral leishmaniasis
caused by Leishmania donovani is endemic. It was approved
by the ethics committee of the Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras
Hindu University, Varanasi.
Trial procedures and treatment
After completing baseline testing (standard haematological and
biochemistry profiles, urine analysis, chest radiography,
electrocardiography, testing for anti-HIV by ELISA, and malaria
smear)9 and providing written informed consent (from
parent or guardian for children), participants were randomised by
sealed envelope to receive 5 mg/kg of liposomal amphotericin (AmBisome,
NeXstar, Paris) as a single infusion or as once daily infusions of 1 mg/kg for five consecutive days. An independent statistician prepared
the randomisation envelopes using a computer based random number
generator. The study staff opened consecutively numbered envelopes
containing the treatment assignment after eligible patients fulfilled
the entry criteria.
|
Statistical analysis
We compared response rates in the treatment groups by Fisher's
exact test and calculated exact binomial 95% confidence intervals for
the individual proportions responding to each treatment regimen. The
objective of this study was to gather preliminary data on the relative
efficacy of two treatments that would, if the results warranted it,
inform the design of a more precise trial with appropriate statistical power.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Patient characteristics and initial responses
The figure shows the flow of participants through the trial,
and table 1 summarises the clinical features at entry to the
study. Thirty six subjects had not responded to pentavalent antimony
(sodium antimony gluconate, 20 mg/kg per day for
28
days
3 9
); none had received amphotericin B. The groups
were well matched except for haemoglobin concentration and platelet
count (table 1).
|
|
Adverse reactions
Twenty four (52%) patients in the single dose group and 20 (44%)
in the five dose group had no reaction during or after any infusion. In
the remaining patients, reactions were mainly mild, related to the
infusion (typical of reactions associated with amphotericin B), and
seldom persisted beyond one or two hours after the end of the infusion.
In the single dose group, three patients experienced increased
temperature alone, one chills alone, and 18 both; two patients vomited
once. In the five dose group, four patients had at least one episode of
higher fever alone, one chills alone, and 18 both; two had brief
vomiting and two had transient back pain. Blood urea nitrogen and
creatinine concentrations did not change from day 0 in either group
(table 1).
Outcome and retreatment
We followed all apparently cured patients for six months after
treatment.
3 9 13
Five patients had asymptomatic relapses
that were confirmed by microscopy (three in single dose group, two in
five dose group, table 2). All other participants were asymptomatic,
appeared healthy, and were judged to have a definitive cure. Thus,
overall, liposomal amphotericin (5 mg/kg) cured 92% of patients
(84/91), 91% (95% confidence interval 79% to 98%) of those treated
with a single infusion and 93% (82% to 99%) of those who received
five daily infusions of 1 mg/kg (table 2).
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this uncontrolled, observational pilot study, we found that low dose liposomal amphotericin induced rapid resolution of fever, prompt clinical improvement, and an overall cure rate of 92%. We found no evidence that delivering the total dose of 5 mg/kg as a single infusion was less effective than splitting the dose over five days. However, the small sample size means that the study did not have enough power to prove the equivalence of these two regimens.
A second limitation of the study is that clinical assessment of the initial and six month responses to treatment was not blinded. Nevertheless, the definition of initial cure required the splenic aspirate smear to be free of parasites on microscopy, and this test was done blinded. In addition, the clinical presentation of relapse is not usually affected by previous treatment, and relapse was objectively confirmed in a splenic aspirate.
Resistance
Another issue is whether patients who relapse or do not respond to
low dose treatment could develop resistance to amphotericin B. Our
approach is to retreat patients in whom treatment fails with
conventional amphotericin B.
4 13
Although the results are
limited, none of the 13 patients who failed to respond to low dose
liposomal amphotericin B13 or the 32 who did not respond
to short course, low dose amphotericin B lipid complex
treatment4 have shown clinical resistance to amphotericin B.
Cost of treatment
The principal rationale for testing low or single dose regimens is
to identify a treatment that is not only effective and convenient but
affordable. Commercially available lipid formulations of amphotericin B
are expensive, and the cost of even short course or low dose
regimens
4 10 14
are an insurmountable obstacle in the
developing world.1 For example, US average wholesale
prices for the various lipid formulations of amphotericin B are $188
(£125) per 50 mg vial for AmBisome (liposomal), $93 per 50 mg for
Amphotec (cholesterol dispersion), and $194 per 100 mg for Abelcet
(lipid complex).15 The regimen for liposomal amphotericin
B approved by the US Federal Drugs Administration for visceral
leishmaniasis consists of 3 mg/kg given on days 1-5, 14, and 21 (total
dose, 21 mg/kg).16 AmBisome currently costs about $173 per
50 mg in India, and in a 25 kg patient the regimen equates to about
$1900. The regimen used in our study, which produced cure rates of 92%
rather than 97%, would cost $519. This is more affordable but still
too high.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Contributors: SS participated in designing the study, collecting the data, and writing the paper and was the principal investigator, He is guarantor of the paper. GA, MR, and MKM were involved in clinical assessment of patients and collecting data. HWM collaborated on the design of the study, was responsible for interpreting data, and helped with writing the paper.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: The Sitaram Memorial trust provided partial financial support for this study, and NeXstar provided the AmBisome. NeXstar had no role in gathering or interpreting the data or in deciding if the study was to be submitted for publication.
Competing interests: SS has been reimbursed by NeXstar for attending several conferences. SS has also served as principal investigator for two trials of AmBisome funded by NeXstar in India.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Bora D. Epidemiology of visceral leishmaniasis in India. Natl Med J India 1999; 12: 62-68[Medline]. |
| 2. | Lal S, Saxena NBL, Dhillon GPS. Kala-azar cases and deaths. In: Manual on visceral leishmaniasis (kala-azar) in India. Annexure VII. New Delhi: National Malarial Eradication Programme, 1996:167-177. |
| 3. | Sundar S, More DK, Singh MK, Singh VP, Sharma S, Makharia A, et al. Failure of pentavalent antimony in visceral leishmaniasis in India: report from the center of the Indian epidemic. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31: 1104-1107[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 4. | Murray HW. Treatment of visceral leishmaniasis (kala-azar): a decade of progress and future approaches. Int J Infect Dis 2000; 4: 158-177[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 5. |
Herwaldt BL.
Miltefosine: the long-awaited therapy for visceral leishmaniasis?
N Engl J Med
1999;
341:
1840-1842 |
| 6. | Jha TK, Olliaro P, Thakur CP, Kanyok TP, Singhania BL, Singh IJ, et al. Randomised controlled trial of aminosidine (paromomycin) v sodium stibogluconate for treating visceral leishmaniasis in North Bihar, India. BMJ 1998; 361: 1200-1205. |
| 7. | Thakur CP, Singh RK, Hassan SM, Kumar R, Narain S, Kumar A. Amphotericin B deoxycholate treatment of visceral leishmaniasis with newer modes of administration and precautions: a study of 938 cases. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1999; 93: 319-323[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 8. | Dietze R, Fagundes S, Brito E, Milan EP, Feitosa TF, Suassana FA, et al. Treatment of kala-azar in Brazil with Amphocil (amphotericin B cholesterol dispersion) for 5 days. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1995; 89: 309-311[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 9. |
Sundar S, Agrawal NK, Sinha PR, Horwith GS, Murray HW.
Short-course, low-dose amphotericin B lipid complex therapy for visceral leishmaniasis unresponsive to antimony.
Ann Intern Med
1997;
127:
133-137 |
| 10. | Davidson RN, di Martino L, Gradoni L, Giacchino R, Gaeta GB, Pempinello R, et al. Short-course treatment of visceral leishmaniasis with liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome). Clin Infect Dis 1996; 22: 938-943[Medline]. |
| 11. | Di Martino L, Davidson RN, Giacchino R, Scotti S, Raimondi F, Castagnola E, et al. Treatment of visceral leishmaniasis in children with liposomal amphotericin B. J Pediatr 1997; 131: 271-277[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 12. | Berman JD, Badaro R, Thakur CP, Wasunna KM, Behbehani K, Davidson R, et al. Efficacy and safety of liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) for visceral leishmaniasis in endemic developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 1998; 76: 25-32[Medline]. |
| 13. | Sundar S, Jha TK, Thakur CP, Mishra M, Singh VP, Buffels R. Low
dose liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) in refractory Indian visceral
leishmaniasis a multicenter study. Am J Trop Med Hyg (in
press).
|
| 14. | Sundar S, Goyal AK, More DK, Singh MK, Murray HW. Ultra-short-course amphotericin B lipid complex treatment for antimony-unresponsive Indian visceral leishmaniasis. Ann Trop Med Parasitol 1998; 92: 755-764[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 15. | Drug topics redbook. Montavale, NJ: Medical Economics, 1999. |
| 16. | Meyerhoff A. US Food and Drug Administration approval of AmBisome (liposomal amphotericin B) for treatment of visceral leishmaniasis. Clin Infect Dis 1999; 28: 42-48[Medline]. |
| 17. | Thakur CP, Pandey AK, Sinha GP, Roy S, Behbehani K, Olliaro P. Comparison of three treatment regimens with liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) for visceral leishmaniasis in India: a randomized dose-finding study. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 1996; 90: 319-322[CrossRef][Medline]. |
(Accepted 14 May 2001)
Diana N J Lockwood Hospital for Tropical
Diseases, London WC1E 6AU
Diana.Lockwood{at}lshtm.ac.uk
Leishmania are inoculated into humans by the bite of
infected sandflies. In the Indian subcontinent the infection is
anthroponotic; man is the only known reservoir. The close proximity of
humans, cows, and sandflies in Indian villages provides ideal
conditions for spread of the disease.
Control of the disease depends on controlling sandflies and detecting
and treating human disease early. Since the end of the antimalarial
campaigns there has been little systematic use of insecticides, and the
proposal to ban the use of the cheap and effective dicophane (DDT)
poses an extra threat to control measures. Treatment is therefore the
mainstay of control. Pentavalent antimonials have been the treatment of
choice since the 1920s, but resistance is increasing in India. Thus
there is an urgent need for new drugs. Currently three drugs are being
evaluated for visceral leishmaniasis in India, liposomal amphotericin
B, paromomycin, and oral miltefosine.1
The exclusion criteria used in the study by Sundar et al show the
degree of weight loss and the effects of disease and splenomegaly on
the haemoglobin, granulocyte, and platelet counts. Splenic aspirate
remains the best method of diagnosis. It is simpler and less painful
than a bone marrow aspirate and is the only means of assessing the
parasitic response to treatment.
This study shows that a one day course of treatment can cure the
disease in 90% of very sick patients. This is good but tantalising news for patients, many of whom are landless peasants. Their earning capacities will have been seriously impaired by their disease. The
families' financial losses are increased because relatives have to
care for and feed patients while they are in hospital.
Nevertheless, we cannot be sure that a 90% cure rate would be adequate
to prevent the emergence of resistance. Studying drug resistance in
leishmaniasis is difficult. Amastigote-macrophage cultures have to be
used because there are no molecular markers of resistance. But
monitoring drug resistance is important, especially when monotherapy is
used in an anthroponotic focus. Perhaps short combined regimens should
be developed to ensure that the range of drugs for leishmaniasis
remains adequate.
The drug treatment of leishmaniasis highlights the problems of
delivering effective drugs to resource poor settings. Paromomycin has
been shown to be more effective than antimony,2 but the drug has still not yet reached patients. Four years ago, the drug had
no manufacturer. An industrial partner has now been found, but the
tropical disease research programme at the World Health Organization
does not have the funds to complete the comparative studies needed for
drug registration.
Liposomal amphotericin remains an extremely expensive drug that no
patient or health service in the developing world is ever going to be
able to buy, and there are no patient activists to pressurise the
manufacturer into providing the drug at an affordable price.
Competing interests: None declared.
![]()
Footnotes
![]()
References
1.
Jha TK, Sundar S, Thakur CP, Bachmann P, Karbwang J, Fischer C, et al.
Miltefosine, an oral agent, for the treatment of Indian visceral leishmaniasis.
N Engl J Med
1999;
341:
1795-1800 2.
Jha TK, Olliaro P, Thakur CPN, Kanyok TP, Singhania BL, Singh IJ, et al.
Randomised controlled trial of aminosidine (paromomycin) v sodium stibogluconate for treating visceral leishmaniasis.
BMJ
1998;
316:
1200-1205
© BMJ 2001