Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Safety and Efficacy of Liposomal Amphotericin B Compared with Conventional Amphotericin B for Induction Therapy of Histoplasmosis in Patients with AIDS
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Safety and Efficacy of Liposomal Amphotericin B Compared with Conventional Amphotericin B for Induction Therapy of Histoplasmosis in Patients with AIDS
Do you wish to request the book?
Safety and Efficacy of Liposomal Amphotericin B Compared with Conventional Amphotericin B for Induction Therapy of Histoplasmosis in Patients with AIDS
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Safety and Efficacy of Liposomal Amphotericin B Compared with Conventional Amphotericin B for Induction Therapy of Histoplasmosis in Patients with AIDS
2002
Overview
In patients with moderate to severe histoplasmosis associated with AIDS, the preferred treatment has been the deoxycholate formulation of amphotericin B. However, serious side effects are associated with use of amphotericin B.
To compare amphotericin B with liposomal amphotericin B for induction therapy of moderate to severe disseminated histoplasmosis in patients with AIDS.
Randomized, double-blind, multicenter clinical trial.
21 sites of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group.
81 patients with AIDS and moderate to severe disseminated histoplasmosis.
Clinical success, conversion of baseline blood cultures to negative, and acute toxicities that necessitated discontinuation of treatment.
Clinical success was achieved in 14 of 22 patients (64%) treated with amphotericin B compared with 45 of 51 patients (88%) receiving liposomal amphotericin B (difference, 24 percentage points [95% CI, 1 to 52 percentage points]). Culture conversion rates were similar. Three patients treated with amphotericin B and one treated with liposomal amphotericin B died during induction (P = 0.04). Infusion-related side effects were greater with amphotericin B (63%) than with liposomal amphotericin B (25%) (P = 0.002). Nephrotoxicity occurred in 37% of patients treated with amphotericin B and 9% of patients treated with liposomal amphotericin B (P = 0.003).
Liposomal amphotericin B seems to be a less toxic alternative to amphotericin B and is associated with improved survival.
Publisher
American College of Physicians
Subject
Acquired immune deficiency syndrome
/ AIDS
/ AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections - drug therapy
/ Amphotericin B - administration & dosage
/ Amphotericin B - adverse effects
/ Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents
/ Antifungal Agents - administration & dosage
/ Antifungal Agents - adverse effects
/ Biological and medical sciences
/ Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury - etiology
/ Histoplasmosis - drug therapy
/ Humans
/ Mycoses
/ Pharmacology. Drug treatments
/ Safety
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.