These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: 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: Wingard JR, White MH, Anaissie E, Raffalli J, Goodman J, Arrieta A, L Amph/ABLC Collaborative Study Group.
    Journal: Clin Infect Dis; 2000 Nov; 31(5):1155-63. PubMed ID: 11073745.
    Abstract:
    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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]