W. Kruger et al., ANTIMYCOTIC THERAPY WITH LIPOSOMAL AMPHOTERICIN-B FOR PATIENTS UNDERGOING BONE-MARROW OR PERIPHERAL-BLOOD STEM-CELL TRANSPLANTATION, Leukemia & lymphoma, 24(5-6), 1997, pp. 491-499
Suspected deep or systemic mycosis in patients undergoing high-dose th
erapy and autologous or allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) r
equires an immediate systemic antimycotic therapy. Intravenous therapy
with the standard drug conventional amphotericin-B is associated with
severe adverse effects like nephrotoxicity and chills. Furthermore, B
MT patients often receive other potential nephrotoxic drugs such as Cs
A or virustatics. In this study, we report 74 BMT-patients treated wit
h liposomal amphotericin-B for culture-documented aspergillosis (n = 5
) or candidiasis (n = 6), or for serologically (n = 35) or clinically
suspected mycosis or as prophylaxis (n = 2). Therapy was initiated wit
h a median dose of 2,8 (0,64-5,09) mg/kg body weight and continued for
13 (1-55) days. The drug was excellently tolerated and only in one wa
s therapy stopped due to severe chills and fever. Severe organ impairm
ent was not observed under therapy with liposomal amphotericin-B. Crea
tinine decreased in five patients after an increase under preceding th
erapy with the conventional formulation. Influence of liposomal amphot
ericin-B on bilirubin and transaminases was difficult to evaluate due
to therapy-related toxicity, veno-occlusive disease (VOD), and graft-v
ersus-host disease (GVHD). 10/11 culture positive patients died from a
spergillosis (5/5) or candidiasis (5/6), but in 9/11 of these subjects
the immunity was additionally compromised by GvHD, steroid therapy, a
nd VOD. Liposomal amphotericin-B was effective in preventing relapse o
f systemic mycosis in 10/12 patients with a history of aspergillosis (
n = 11) or candidiasis (n = 1). We conclude, that favourable toxicity
of liposomal amphotericin-B should encourage dose escalation studies o
f liposomal amphotericin-B randomised against the conventional formula
tion and that the comparison of patients undergoing BMT with patients
under standard chemotherapy might be difficult because of additional r
isk factors of the BMT-patients.