1996
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0507.1996.tb00090.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Liposomal amphotericin B as early empiric antimycotic therapy of pneumonia in granulocytopenic patients

Abstract: Twenty-three neutropenic patients with haematological malignancies and febrile pulmonary infiltrates were empirically treated with liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) in addition to broad-spectrum antibiotics. AmBisome was given on alternate days in two different dosages: 3 mg kg-1 in patients with pneumonia but without radiological signs or other evidence of Aspergillus infection and 5 mg kg-1 in pneumonia patients with suspected Aspergillus infection. The main objectives of this study were to compare the res… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
2

Year Published

1998
1998
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
(9 reference statements)
1
7
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Should the conventional formulation be contraindicated, one of the lipid‐complexed formulations should be used instead ( Bohme & Hoelzer, 1996). For example, in a Europe‐wide, randomized, double‐blind comparative trial of the liposomal formulation of amphotericin B (AmBisome) versus conventional amphotericin B (cAMB) in the empiric treatment of both paediatric and adult febrile neutropenic patients AmBisome (3 mg/kg/d) was as effective as cAMB in the prevention of proven treatment‐emergent fungal infections ( Prentice et al , 1997 ).…”
Section: Empirical Treatment For Presumed Infectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Should the conventional formulation be contraindicated, one of the lipid‐complexed formulations should be used instead ( Bohme & Hoelzer, 1996). For example, in a Europe‐wide, randomized, double‐blind comparative trial of the liposomal formulation of amphotericin B (AmBisome) versus conventional amphotericin B (cAMB) in the empiric treatment of both paediatric and adult febrile neutropenic patients AmBisome (3 mg/kg/d) was as effective as cAMB in the prevention of proven treatment‐emergent fungal infections ( Prentice et al , 1997 ).…”
Section: Empirical Treatment For Presumed Infectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unfortunately, this formulation is highly nephrotoxic and shows side effects as fevers, malaise, weight loss, headache, hypotension, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, normochromic normocytic anemia, and myalgia (Sabra and Branch, 1990; Meunier et al, 1991; Ringden et al, 1991; Gulati et al, 1998; Laniado-Laborin and Cabrales-Vargas, 2009). For this reason, new formulations have been introduced in the last years (Lopez-Berestein et al, 1985; Bohme and Hoelzer, 1996; Gulati et al, 1998; Rust and Jameson, 1998; Walsh et al, 1998; Dupont, 2002). The new presentations have reduced toxicity because they are lipid-carried presentations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…So far, the effectiveness of liposomal amphotericin B in the treatment of fungal infection has been shown in retrospective studies until last year [ 12–17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With respect to pharmacokinetics, plasma levels of amphotericin B will be increased significantly. A decrease in the volume of distribution goes along with a prolonged circulation in the bloodstream [ 11–18]. Due to its small particle size AmBisome ® can escape immediate clearance by the monocyte–macrophage system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%