Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Assoc Physicians India. 2002 May;50(5):662-70.

Open label, randomised, comparative phase III safety and efficacy study with conventional amphotericin B and liposomal amphotericin B in patients with systemic fungal infection.

Author information

  • 1Liposome Clinical Pharmacology Centre, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai.



To compare conventional amphotericin B (c-amp B) and liposomal amphotericin B (L-AMP-LRC-1-India) in patients with systemic fungal infection in open, randomized, comparative, laboratory blind, phase III safety and efficacy study.


Formulation of liposomal amphotericin B - L-AMP-LRC-1, containing natural phospholipids, was prepared and tested at the Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, India. Patients suffering from proven systemic fungal infection, were treated with c-amp B or L-AMP-LRC-1 with 17 patients in each group. Data was compared for the safety and efficacy.



L-AMP-LRC-1 was better tolerated than c-amp B. Out of the 695 infusions of c-amp B fever occurred on 25.04% occasions in 68.42% patients, while it occurred on 2.09% occasions out of 767 infusions (in 30.43% patients of L-AMP-LRC-1. Chills occurred on 16.83% and 1.17% occasions after c-amp B and liposomal amphotericin B respectively. Other adverse effects observed on 0.2-5% of occasions were: headache, nausea, vomiting, palpitation and dizziness occurring more frequently in c-amp B group. The L-AMP-LRC-1 did not cause bronchospasm at 1 mg/kg dose in a patient who developed bronchospasm to 0.1 mg/kg dose of c-amp B. The L-AMP-LRC-1 was found to be less nephrotoxic than c-amp B and could be administered to patients who had renal problems or had undergone renal transplant. L-AMP-LRC-1 caused less hypokalemia than c-amp B. Effficacy: 17/17 patients in L-AMP-LRC-1 group and 14/17 in c-amp B group had complete response (100% and 82.35% response rate). The number of infusions and dose of amphotericin B and L-AMP-LRC-1 used were similar and required individualization of duration of treatment (in cases where response to fixed duration was not observed). All the patients were treated with 0.5 to 1.0 mg/kg/day dose of L-AMP-LRC-1 (except one patient required 2 mg/kg dose). This is markedly different from other marketed liposome and lipid formulations, which are recommended at higher (3-5 mg/kg) doses every day. At the same time L-AMP-LRC-1 being prepared from naturally occurring lipids is expected to cost at least one-third of the marketed formulation. Thus cost of every day treatment would be very much less compared to other delivery systems. Thus L-AMP-LRC-1 will be an economical and safe treatment option available to the physicians for the treatment of systemic fungal infection.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk