DrugLib.com — Drug Information Portal

Rx drug information, pharmaceutical research, clinical trials, news, and more



A randomized, double-blind comparative trial evaluating the safety of liposomal amphotericin B versus amphotericin B lipid complex in the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia. L Amph/ABLC Collaborative Study Group.

Author(s): Wingard JR, White MH, Anaissie E, Raffalli J, Goodman J, Arrieta A, L Amph/ABLC Collaborative Study Group

Affiliation(s): Division of Hematology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL 32610-0277, USA. wingajr@medicine.ufl.edu

Publication date & source: 2000-11, Clin Infect Dis., 31(5):1155-63. Epub 2000 Nov 7.

Publication type: Clinical Trial; Multicenter Study; Randomized Controlled Trial

In this double-blind study to compare safety of 2 lipid formulations of amphotericin B, neutropenic patients with unresolved fever after 3 days of antibacterial therapy were randomized (1:1:1) to receive amphotericin B lipid complex (ABLC) at a dose of 5 mg/kg/d (n=78), liposomal amphotericin B (L Amph) at a dose of 3 mg/kg/d (n=85), or L Amph at a dose of 5 mg/kg/d (n=81). L Amph (3 mg/kg/d and 5 mg/kg/d) had lower rates of fever (23.5% and 19.8% vs. 57.7% on day 1; P<.001), chills/rigors (18.8% and 23.5% vs. 79.5% on day 1; P<.001), nephrotoxicity (14.1% and 14.8% vs. 42.3%; P<.01), and toxicity-related discontinuations of therapy (12.9% and 12.3% vs. 32.1%; P=.004). After day 1, infusional reactions were less frequent with ABLC, but chills/rigors were still higher (21.0% and 24.3% vs. 50.7%; P<.001). Therapeutic success was similar in all 3 groups.

Page last updated: 2006-01-31

-- advertisement -- The American Red Cross
We comply with
HONcode standard.
Verify here.
Home | About Us | Contact Us | Site usage policy | Privacy policy

All Rights reserved - Copyright DrugLib.com, 2006-2009