Summaries for Patients |

Treatment of Histoplasmosis in Patients with HIV Infection FREE

[+] Article, Author, and Disclosure Information

The summary below is from the full report titled “Safety and Efficacy of Liposomal Amphotericin B Compared with Conventional Amphotericin B for Induction Therapy of Histoplasmosis in Patients with AIDS.” It is in the 16 July 2002 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine (volume 137, pages 105-109). The authors are PC Johnson, LJ Wheat, GA Cloud, M Goldman, D Lancaster, DM Bamberger, WG Powderly, R Hafner, CA Kauffman, and WE Dismukes, for the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group.

Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(2):I-54. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-137-2-200207160-00004
Text Size: A A A

What is the problem and what is known about it so far?

People who are infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have weak immune systems and cannot fight infections well. Sometimes, they get serious infections with fungi. The fungal infections can spread throughout the body and can be fatal. Successful treatment requires taking powerful antifungal drugs for long periods (weeks to months).

Histoplasmosis is a serious fungal infection that occurs in as many as 5% to 20% of people with HIV infection. The standard initial treatment for severe histoplasmosis is a drug called amphotericin B. Amphotericin B is usually given daily, through a vein, for a few weeks. Later, a different antifungal drug that can be taken by mouth is given for several months. Many side effects, such as fever, chills, nausea, and problems with kidney function, can occur with standard preparations of amphotericin B. New preparations of amphotericin B that do not have as many side effects are needed.

Why did the researchers do this particular study?

To compare the efficacy and safety of two different preparations of amphotericin B for treating severe histoplasmosis in adults with HIV infection.

Who was studied?

81 adults with HIV infection and histoplasmosis that had spread (disseminated) throughout the body.

How was the study done?

Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a standard preparation of amphotericin B or a special preparation called liposomal amphotericin B. Both preparations were given through a vein over a period of 2 hours each day for several days (1 to 2 weeks). Neither the patients nor their doctors knew which preparation was given. Patients who improved were switched to an antifungal drug (itraconozole) that was given by mouth. Treatment response was defined as no fever for at least 3 days; no worsening of any symptoms, physical findings, or laboratory test results; and improvement in at least one symptom or finding related to histoplasmosis. After 3 months of follow-up, the researchers compared treatment responses and side effects in patients given standard amphotericin B and those given liposomal amphotericin B.

What did the researchers find?

Patients given liposomal amphotericin B responded to treatment more often than those given standard amphotericin B (88% vs. 64%). Fewer patients given liposomal amphotericin died (2% vs. 13%). Only 25% of the patients who were given liposomal amphotericin B had side effects; 63% of the patients given the standard preparation had side effects. Fewer patients who received liposomal amphotericin had problems with kidney function (9%) than those given the standard preparation (37%).

What were the limitations of the study?

Both preparations were given into the veins over a 2-hour period. Either preparation given more slowly and continuously over a 24-hour period might work better and cause fewer side effects.

What are the implications of the study?

Although expensive, liposomal amphotericin B is better than standard amphotericin B for treating disseminated histoplasmosis in patients with HIV infection.





Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).


Submit a Comment/Letter
Submit a Comment/Letter

Summary for Patients

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.


Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Related Articles
Related Point of Care
Topic Collections
PubMed Articles
Forgot your password?
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.