Cited by 1,205Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityNeutropenia and Cancer InfectionsFungal Infections and Studies

Liposomal Amphotericin B for Empirical Therapy in Patients with Persistent Fever and Neutropenia

Open access
Walsh, Thomas J., Finberg, Robert W., Arndt, Carola, Hiemenz, John, Schwartz, Cindy, Bodensteiner, David, Pappas, Peter, Seibel, Nita +5 more·1999·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In patients with persistent fever and neutropenia, amphotericin B is administered empirically for the early treatment and prevention of clinically occult invasive fungal infections. However, breakthrough fungal infections can develop despite treatment, and amphotericin B has substantial toxicity. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial comparing liposomal amphotericin B with conventional amphotericin B as empirical antifungal therapy. RESULTS: The mean duration of therapy was 10.8 days for liposomal amphotericin B (343 patients) and 10.3 days for conventional amphotericin B (344 patients). The composite rates of successful treatment were similar (50 percent for liposomal amphotericin B and 49 percent for conventional amphotericin B) and were independent of the use of antifungal prophylaxis or colony-stimulating factors. The outcomes were similar with liposomal amphotericin B and conventional amphotericin B with respect to survival (93 percent and 90 percent, respectively), resolution of fever (58 percent and 58 percent), and discontinuation of the study drug because of toxic effects or lack of efficacy (14 percent and 19 percent). There were fewer proved breakthrough fungal infections among patients treated with liposomal amphotericin B (11 patients [3.2 percent]) than among those treated with conventional amphotericin B (27 patients [7.8 percent], P=0.009). With the liposomal preparation significantly fewer patients had infusion-related fever (17 percent vs. 44 percent), chills or rigors (18 percent vs. 54 percent), and other reactions, including hypotension, hypertension, and hypoxia. Nephrotoxic effects (defined by a serum creatinine level two times the upper limit of normal) were significantly less frequent among patients treated with liposomal amphotericin B (19 percent) than among those treated with conventional amphotericin B (34 percent, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Liposomal amphotericin B is as effective as conventional amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in patients with fever and neutropenia, and it is associated with fewer breakthrough fungal infections, less infusion-related toxicity, and less nephrotoxicity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199903113401004

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Liposomal amphotericin B has similar overall clinical efficacy but superior safety and a decreased rate of documented breakthrough fungal infections compared with amphotericin B deoxycholate, particularly in bone marrow transplant recipients.

    “When compared with amphotericin B deoxycholate (median dose, 0.6 mg/ kg per day), liposomal amphotericin B (median dose, 3 mg/kg per day) showed similar overall clinical efficacy but demonstrated superior safety and a decreased rate of documented breakthrough fungal infections, particularly in recipients of bone marrow transplants (A-I) [151].”

    From Guidelines for Treatment of Candidiasis (2004) · cites this paper as [151]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Pannuti C, Gingrich R, Pfaller MA, Kao C, Wenzel RP. Nosocomial pneumonia in patients having bone marrow transplant: attributable mor- tality and risk factors. Cancer 1992;69:2653-62.
  2. Pizzo PA, Armstrong D, Bodey G, et al. The design, analysis and re- porting of clinical trials on the empirical antibiotic management of the neutropenic patient: report of a consensus panel. J Infect Dis 1990;161: 397-401.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Walsh, T. J., Finberg, R. W., Arndt, C., Hiemenz, J., Schwartz, C., Bodensteiner, D., Pappas, P., Seibel, N., Greenberg, R. N., Dummer, S., Schuster, M., Dismukes, W. E., & Holcenberg, J. S.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Moffitt Cancer Center (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Alabama (US)
  • Children's National (US)
  • University of Kentucky (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Seattle Children's Hospital (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1999-03-11
Volume
340
Issue
10
Pages
764-771
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2326799365
Cited by
1,205
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 54
FWCI
51.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital
  • Vanderbilt University
  • University of Pennsylvania
  • Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
  • Syracuse University
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • University of Rochester
  • University of Oregon
  • National Institutes of Health (n01ai065296-009)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • National Cancer Institute
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (N01AI65296)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Neutropenia and Cancer Infections
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
Keywords
liposomal amphotericin B, empirical antifungal therapy, persistent fever, neutropenia, invasive fungal infections, breakthrough fungal infection, infusion-related toxicity, nephrotoxicity, antifungal prophylaxis, colony-stimulating factors
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Amphotericin B, Antifungal Agents, Child, Child, Preschool, Double-Blind Method, Drug Carriers, Female, Fever, Humans, Infusions, Intravenous, Kidney, Liposomes, Male, Middle Aged, Mycoses, Neutropenia, Treatment Outcome, Antibiotic Prophylaxis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review