-
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection... 2023COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) has emerged as a frequent complication in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, little is known about this... (Observational Study)
Observational Study Randomized Controlled Trial
COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) has emerged as a frequent complication in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, little is known about this life-threatening fungal superinfection in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs), including whether targeted anti-mold prophylaxis might be justified in this immunosuppressed population. We performed a multicentric observational retrospective study of all consecutive ICU-admitted COVID-19 SOTRs between August 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. SOTRs receiving antifungal prophylaxis with nebulized amphotericin-B were compared with those without prophylaxis. CAPA was defined according the ECMM/ISHAM criteria. Sixty-four SOTRs were admitted to ICU for COVID-19 during the study period. One patient received antifungal prophylaxis with isavuconazole and was excluded from the analysis. Of the remaining 63 SOTRs, nineteen (30.2%) received anti-mold prophylaxis with nebulized amphotericin-B. Ten SOTRs who did not receive prophylaxis developed pulmonary mold infections (nine CAPA and one mucormycosis) compared with one who received nebulized amphotericin-B (22.7% vs 5.3%; risk ratio 0.23; 95%CI 0.032-1.68), but with no differences in survival. No severe adverse events related to nebulized amphotericin-B were recorded. SOTRs admitted to ICU with COVID-19 are at high risk for CAPA. However, nebulized amphotericin-B is safe and might reduce the incidence of CAPA in this high-risk population. A randomized clinical trial to confirm these findings is warranted.
Topics: Humans; Amphotericin B; Antifungal Agents; Retrospective Studies; COVID-19; Organ Transplantation
PubMed: 37180450
DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2023.1165236 -
Revista Espanola de Quimioterapia :... Dec 2015This article presents an overview of the characteristics of liposomes as drug carriers, particularly in relation to liposomal formulations of amphotericin B. General... (Review)
Review
This article presents an overview of the characteristics of liposomes as drug carriers, particularly in relation to liposomal formulations of amphotericin B. General features regarding structure, liposome-cell interactions, stability, encapsulation of active substances and elimination of liposomes are described. Up to the present time extensive efforts to produce similar or bioequivalent products of amphotericin B formulations, in particular in the case of liposomal amphotericin B, have been unsuccessful in spite of having a very similar composition and even an apparently identical manufacturing process. Guidelines for the development of generic liposomal formulations developed by the FDA and EMA are also summarized. Based on the available evidence of the composition of liposomes, any differences in the manufacturing process even if the same lipid composition is used may result in different final products. Therefore, it seems unreasonable to infer that all amphotericin B liposomal formulations are equal in efficacy and safety.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Animals; Antifungal Agents; Chemistry, Pharmaceutical; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Carriers; Drug Compounding; Drug Evaluation, Preclinical; Humans; Liposomes; Mycoses; Phospholipids; Unilamellar Liposomes
PubMed: 26621170
DOI: No ID Found -
Revista Iberoamericana de Micologia 2021Liposomal amphotericin B is a lipid formulation of the antifungal drug amphotericin B with some distinguishing characteristics in its pharmacological behavior that...
Liposomal amphotericin B is a lipid formulation of the antifungal drug amphotericin B with some distinguishing characteristics in its pharmacological behavior that entail some clinical differences of great interest. The significant improvement in the systemic and renal tolerability is one of them. This fact is related to the great stability of the liposome, promoted by its negative charge, the presence of cholesterol and the remarkable thermo-stability of the remaining lipids that compose it. In this situation, amphotericin B seems to be released from the liposome not spontaneously but when the liposome binds to the ergosterol in the fungal cell membrane. For this reason, there is almost no free amphotericin B in plasma or tissues, although it seems that its availability is greater when there is fungal infection. As a consequence, when the pharmacokinetic behavior is studied, the concentration and availability of liposomal amphotericin B are very high, and its volume of distribution is reduced in comparison with the other formulations.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Antifungal Agents; Humans; Liposomes; Mycoses; Pharmacology, Clinical
PubMed: 33992527
DOI: 10.1016/j.riam.2021.02.004 -
MSphere Oct 2019, , and cause life-threatening candidiasis, cryptococcosis, and aspergillosis, resulting in several hundred thousand deaths annually. The patients at the greatest risk...
, , and cause life-threatening candidiasis, cryptococcosis, and aspergillosis, resulting in several hundred thousand deaths annually. The patients at the greatest risk of developing these life-threatening invasive fungal infections have weakened immune systems. The vulnerable population is increasing due to rising numbers of immunocompromised individuals as a result of HIV infection or immunosuppressed individuals receiving anticancer therapies and/or stem cell or organ transplants. While patients are treated with antifungals such as amphotericin B, all antifungals have serious limitations due to lack of sufficient fungicidal effect and/or host toxicity. Even with treatment, 1-year survival rates are low. We explored methods of increasing drug effectiveness by designing fungicide-loaded liposomes specifically targeted to fungal cells. Most pathogenic fungi are encased in cell walls and exopolysaccharide matrices rich in mannans. Dectin-2 is a mammalian innate immune membrane receptor that binds as a dimer to mannans and signals fungal infection. We coated amphotericin-loaded liposomes with monomers of Dectin-2's mannan-binding domain, sDectin-2. sDectin monomers were free to float in the lipid membrane and form dimers that bind mannan substrates. sDectin-2-coated liposomes bound orders of magnitude more efficiently to the extracellular matrices of several developmental stages of , , and than untargeted control liposomes. Dectin-2-coated amphotericin B-loaded liposomes reduced the growth and viability of all three species more than an order of magnitude more efficiently than untargeted control liposomes and dramatically decreased the effective dose. Future efforts focus on examining pan-antifungal targeted liposomal drugs in animal models of fungal diseases. Invasive fungal diseases caused by , , and have mortality rates ranging from 10 to 95%. Individual patient costs may exceed $100,000 in the United States. All antifungals in current use have serious limitations due to host toxicity and/or insufficient fungal cell killing that results in recurrent infections. Few new antifungal drugs have been introduced in the last 2 decades. Hence, there is a critical need for improved antifungal therapeutics. By targeting antifungal-loaded liposomes to α-mannans in the extracellular matrices secreted by these fungi, we dramatically reduced the effective dose of drug. Dectin-2-coated liposomes loaded with amphotericin B bound 50- to 150-fold more strongly to , , and than untargeted liposomes and killed these fungi more than an order of magnitude more efficiently. Targeting drug-loaded liposomes specifically to fungal cells has the potential to greatly enhance the efficacy of most antifungal drugs.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Antifungal Agents; Aspergillus fumigatus; Candida albicans; Cryptococcus neoformans; Fungi; HEK293 Cells; HT29 Cells; Humans; Lectins, C-Type; Liposomes; Mycoses; Protein Binding
PubMed: 31666315
DOI: 10.1128/mSphere.00715-19 -
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Jul 2018An experimental micellar formulation of 1:1.5 amphotericin B-sodium deoxycholate (AMB:DCH 1:1.5) was obtained and characterized to determine its aggregation state and...
An experimental micellar formulation of 1:1.5 amphotericin B-sodium deoxycholate (AMB:DCH 1:1.5) was obtained and characterized to determine its aggregation state and particle size. The biodistribution, nephrotoxicity, and efficacy against pulmonary aspergillosis in a murine model were studied and compared to the liposomal commercial formulation of amphotericin B after intravenous administration. The administration of 5 mg/kg AMB:DCH 1:1.5 presented 2.8-fold-higher lung concentrations (18.125 ± 3.985 μg/g after 6 daily doses) and lower kidney exposure (0.391 ± 0.167 μg/g) than liposomal commercial amphotericin B (6.567 ± 1.536 and 5.374 ± 1.157 μg/g in lungs and kidneys, respectively). The different biodistribution of AMB:DCH micelle systems compared to liposomal commercial amphotericin B was attributed to their different morphologies and particle sizes. The efficacy study has shown that both drugs administered at 5 mg/kg produced similar survival percentages and reductions of fungal burden. A slightly lower nephrotoxicity, associated with amphotericin B, was observed with AMB:DCH 1:1.5 than the one induced by the liposomal commercial formulation. However, AMB:DCH 1:1.5 reached higher AMB concentrations in lungs, which could represent a therapeutic advantage over liposomal commercial amphotericin B-based treatment of pulmonary aspergillosis. These results are encouraging to explore the usefulness of AMB:DCH 1:1.5 against this disease.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Animals; Antifungal Agents; Deoxycholic Acid; Drug Combinations; Kidney; Lung; Male; Mice; Pulmonary Aspergillosis
PubMed: 29760126
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00489-18 -
Experimental and Clinical... Jan 2021Lung transplant guidelines recommend nebulized amphotericin B with or without systemic antifungal agents for fungal prophylaxis. However, amphotericin formulation,...
OBJECTIVES
Lung transplant guidelines recommend nebulized amphotericin B with or without systemic antifungal agents for fungal prophylaxis. However, amphotericin formulation, dosing, and frequency vary between studies. We assessed the safety and effectiveness of nebulized amphotericin B to prevent Aspergillus infection in 2 regimens, ie, twice daily compared with 3 times daily.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. We included patients at least 14 years old who underwent lung transplant and received nebulized amphotericin B alone or in combination with another antifungal agent either twice daily or 3 times daily. The primary endpoint was the incidence of lung Aspergillus infection, and the secondary endpoints were nebulized amphotericin B side effects and breakthrough Aspergillus infection.
RESULTS
A total of 84 patients were included. The group given nebulized amphotericin twice daily had a higher rate of Aspergillus infection at 17% compared with 4% in the group treated 3 times daily (P = .24). No serious side effects were reported, but coughing and diarrhea were more common in patients who received amphotericin B 3 times daily.
CONCLUSIONS
A systemic antifungal agent combined with nebulized amphotericin either twice or 3 times daily has been effective to prevent Aspergillus infection. Nebulized amphotericin twice daily may be a more viable option to increase a patient's adherence and decrease medication cost and side effects. However, a larger randomized controlled trial is needed to determine the best dosing regimen for nebulized amphotericin B as a fungal prophylaxis after lung transplant.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Antifungal Agents; Aspergillosis; Aspergillus; Humans; Lung Transplantation; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 33441058
DOI: 10.6002/ect.2020.0187 -
The Journal of Antimicrobial... May 2018We examined the in vitro pharmacodynamics and cellular accumulation of the standard anti-leishmanial drugs amphotericin B and miltefosine in intracellular Leishmania...
OBJECTIVES
We examined the in vitro pharmacodynamics and cellular accumulation of the standard anti-leishmanial drugs amphotericin B and miltefosine in intracellular Leishmania donovani amastigote-macrophage drug assays.
METHODS
Primary mouse macrophages were infected with L. donovani amastigotes. In time-kill assays infected macrophages were exposed to at least six different concentrations of serially diluted drugs and the percentage of infected macrophages was determined after 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 and 120 h of exposure. Cellular drug accumulation was measured following exposure to highly effective drug concentrations for 1, 6, 24, 48 and 72 h. Data were analysed through a mathematical model, relating drug concentration to the percentage of infected cells over time. Host cell membrane damage was evaluated through measurement of lactate dehydrogenase release. The effect of varying the serum and albumin concentrations in medium on the cellular accumulation levels of miltefosine was measured.
RESULTS
Amphotericin B was more potent than miltefosine (EC50 values of 0.65 and 1.26 μM, respectively) and displayed a wider therapeutic window in vitro. The kinetics of the cellular accumulation of amphotericin B was concentration- and formulation-dependent. At an extracellular concentration of 10 μM miltefosine maximum cellular drug levels preceded maximum anti-leishmanial kill. Miltefosine induced membrane damage in a concentration-, time- and serum-dependent manner. Its cellular accumulation levels increased with decreasing amounts of protein in assay medium.
CONCLUSIONS
We have developed a novel approach to investigate the cellular pharmacology of anti-leishmanial drugs that serves as a model for the characterization of new drug candidates.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antiprotozoal Agents; Cells, Cultured; Female; Leishmania donovani; Macrophages; Mice, Inbred BALB C; Models, Theoretical; Phosphorylcholine
PubMed: 29506127
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dky014 -
Virulence Dec 2022Amphotericin B (AmB) is a widely used antifungal agent especially for the therapy of systemic fungal infections. However, the severe side effects of AmB often leads to...
Amphotericin B (AmB) is a widely used antifungal agent especially for the therapy of systemic fungal infections. However, the severe side effects of AmB often leads to the premature termination of the treatment. So it is imperative to find the drugs that can both reduce the dosage and enhance the antifungal efficacy of AmB. Here we demonstrated that Nicotinamide (NAM), a cheap and safe vitamin, could enhance the antifungal activities of AmB. We demonstrated the synergistic interaction of NAM and AmB against as well as other spp. and . Moreover, NAM could enhance of the activity of AmB against biofilm. This enhancement was also observed in disseminated candidiasis . Our further study revealed that AmB could induce oxidative damage through the modification of histone acetylation. AmB could inhibit the expression of HST3, an H3K56 deacetylase in . The immunoblotting test revealed excessive H3K56ac in AmB-treated fungal cells. Consistantly, the mutant displayed high sensitivity to AmB, while addition of NAM, an H3K56 deacetylation inhibitor, resulted in an even severe inhibition in the growth of this strain. These results indicated that AmB could execute antifungal activity via boosting H3K56ac which was mediated by HST3, and the mechanism for the synergistic interaction of NAM and AmB was based on exacerbating this process, which led to even excessive H3K56ac and oxidative damage. This finding provided theoretical basis for better understanding the antifungal mechanisms of AmB and clinical application of this drug.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Antifungal Agents; Candida albicans; Candidiasis; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Niacinamide
PubMed: 36068709
DOI: 10.1080/21505594.2022.2119656 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Jun 2018To evaluate the evidence for use of different formulations of amphotericin B (AmB), minimum effective dose for each formulation and its comparative efficacy against... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the evidence for use of different formulations of amphotericin B (AmB), minimum effective dose for each formulation and its comparative efficacy against other drugs in achieving definitive cure of visceral leishmaniasis.
METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis included following data sources: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL. Controlled prospective clinical trials (randomized or nonrandomized, including dose-ranging studies) conducted between 1996 and 2017 with at least one treatment group receiving AmB were included (published data only). The primary outcome was definitive cure at 6 months. Adverse events and mortality were assessed as secondary outcomes. The PROSPERO registration number for this review is CRD42017067488.
RESULTS
Thirty-one studies (26 from India) that enrolled 6903 patients into 84 study groups met the selection criteria. In India, liposomal AmB was not inferior to AmB deoxycholate (relative risk 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96-1.03, two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 514 participants, high-quality evidence), and a single dose of the earlier formulation as low as 3.75 mg/kg achieved a cure rate of over 89% (95% CI 70.6-97.2). AmB deoxycholate was as effective as miltefosine (relative risk 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.03, two trials, 523 participants, high-quality evidence) and may be better than paromomycin (relative risk 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.07, one trial, 667 participants, low-quality evidence) in achieving definitive cure.
CONCLUSIONS
AmB is an efficacious drug in the Indian subcontinent. Further evidence is needed from prospective clinical trials in other endemic geographical regions.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Antiprotozoal Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Deoxycholic Acid; Drug Combinations; Drug Compounding; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Humans; Leishmaniasis, Visceral; Male; Paromomycin; Phosphorylcholine; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29138100
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2017.11.008 -
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Oct 2021and Fusarium species are emerging opportunistic pathogens, causing invasive fungal diseases in humans, particularly in immunocompromised patients. Biofilm-related...
and Fusarium species are emerging opportunistic pathogens, causing invasive fungal diseases in humans, particularly in immunocompromised patients. Biofilm-related infections are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Here, we assessed the ability of Scedosporium apiospermum and Fusarium solani species complex (FSSC) isolates to form biofilms and evaluated the efficacy of deoxycholate amphotericin B (D-AMB), liposomal amphotericin B (L-AMB), and voriconazole (VRC), alone or in combination, against mature biofilms. Biofilm formation was assessed by safranin staining and spectrophotometric measurement of optical density. Planktonic and biofilm damage was assessed by XTT [2,3-bis-(2-methoxy-4-nitro-5-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium-5-carboxanilide salt] reduction assay. Planktonic cell and biofilm MICs were determined as the minimum concentrations that caused ≥50% fungal damage compared to untreated controls. The combined activity of L-AMB (0.5 to 32 mg/liter) and VRC (0.125 to 64 mg/liter) against biofilms was determined by the checkerboard microdilution method and analyzed by the Bliss independence model. Biofilm MICs of D-AMB and L-AMB against S. apiospermum isolates were 1 and 2 mg/liter and against FSSC isolates were 0.5 and 1 mg/liter, respectively. Biofilm MICs of VRC against S. apiospermum and FSSC were 32 mg/liter and >256 mg/liter, respectively. Synergistic effects were observed at 2 to 4 mg/liter of L-AMB combined with 4 to 16 mg/liter of VRC against S. apiospermum biofilms (mean Δ ± standard error, 17% ± 3.7%). Antagonistic interactions were found at 0.5 to 4 mg/liter of L-AMB combined with 0.125 to 16 mg/liter of VRC against FSSC isolates, at -28% ± 2%. D-AMB and L-AMB were more efficacious against S. apiospermum and FSSC biofilms than VRC.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Antifungal Agents; Biofilms; Fusarium; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Scedosporium; Voriconazole
PubMed: 34370583
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00638-21