Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dupont, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dupont, B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (2002) 49, 31-36
© 2002 The British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

Supplement

Overview of the lipid formulations of amphotericin B

Bertrand Dupont,*

Group Hospitalier Necker Enfants Malades, 149 rue de Sèvres, Paris cedex 15, 75743, France

Abstract

Invasive fungal infections have been increasingly recognized as a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the immunocompromised host. Amphotericin B has a broad spectrum and has remained the drug of choice for life-threatening invasive fungal infections. However, adverse events, particularly renal insufficiency, are limiting factors in achieving an effective dose: the prescription of amphotericin B is a compromise between toxicity and efficacy. Lipid formulations offer a better therapeutic index by circumscribing amphotericin B toxicity. Three lipid formulations are available in most countries: AmBisome, the only true liposome; Abelcet, with a ribbon-like structure; and Amphocil/Amphotec, composed of disc-like structures. All these formulations contain amphotericin B, but they differ in shape, size, reticuloendothelial clearance, Cmax, AUC and visceral diffusion. The impact of these differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics on clinical efficacy is still unclear. Efficacy has been shown in neutropenic patients with fever of unknown origin, systemic candidosis, invasive aspergillosis, cryptococcal meningitis and a variety of other difficult-to-treat mycoses, such as Fusarium or Zygomycetes infections. The effective dose may vary from one formulation to the other and is c. 3–5 mg/kg/day. All formulations are less nephrotoxic than amphotericin B. In one randomized double-blind study, AmBisome 3 or 5 mg/kg/day was less nephrotoxic and gave fewer infusion-related events than Abelcet 5 mg/kg/day. Abelcet induces fewer infusion-related side effects than Amphocil. All formulations seem at least as effective as amphotericin B. In some patients with life-threatening mycosis who failed treatment with, or were intolerant to, amphotericin B, the lipid formulations were effective. Further studies with comparable selected high-risk patients are warranted to clarify the usefulness and the indications of each of the formulations. Cost is a factor limiting prescription in many institutions, where use is often restricted to patients intolerant of, or refractory to, amphotericin B.

Notes

* Tel: 33-1-44-49-41-41; Fax: 33-1-42-19-26-22; E-mail: bertrand.dupont{at}nck.ap-hop-paris.fr


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
A. C. Amaral, A. L. Bocca, A. M. Ribeiro, J. Nunes, D. L. G. Peixoto, A. R. Simioni, F. L. Primo, Z. G. M. Lacava, R. Bentes, R. Titze-de-Almeida, et al.
Amphotericin B in poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) and dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) nanoparticles against paracoccidioidomycosis
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., March 1, 2009; 63(3): 526 - 533.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
J. Dotis, M. Simitsopoulou, M. Dalakiouridou, T. Konstantinou, C. Panteliadis, T. J. Walsh, and E. Roilides
Amphotericin B formulations variably enhance antifungal activity of human neutrophils and monocytes against Fusarium solani: comparison with Aspergillus fumigatus
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., April 1, 2008; 61(4): 810 - 817.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
M. L. Goodwin and R. H. Drew
Antifungal serum concentration monitoring: an update
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., January 1, 2008; 61(1): 17 - 25.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.Home page
J. D. Knudsen, I. Odenholt, H. Erlendsdottir, M. Gottfredsson, O. Cars, N. Frimodt-Moller, F. Espersen, K. G. Kristinsson, and S. Gudmundsson
Selection of Resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae during Penicillin Treatment In Vitro and in Three Animal Models
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., August 1, 2003; 47(8): 2499 - 2506.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
M. R. Jacobs, D. Felmingham, P. C. Appelbaum, R. N. Gruneberg, and the Alexander Project Group
The Alexander Project 1998-2000: susceptibility of pathogens isolated from community-acquired respiratory tract infection to commonly used antimicrobial agents
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., August 1, 2003; 52(2): 229 - 246.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Antimicrob ChemotherHome page
R. G. Vitale, J. F. G. M. Meis, J. W. Mouton, and P. E. Verweij
Evaluation of the post-antifungal effect (PAFE) of amphotericin B and nystatin against 30 zygomycetes using two different media
J. Antimicrob. Chemother., July 1, 2003; 52(1): 65 - 70.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.