Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Artigo Produção Nacional Revisado por pares

BIBTEX RIS

Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for candidaemia and invasive candidosis: a phase III randomised double-blind trial

2007; Elsevier BV; Volume: 369; Issue: 9572 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60605-9

1474-547X

Ernst-Rüdiger Kuse, Ploenchan Chetchotisakd, Clóvis Arns da Cunha, Markus Ruhnke, Carlos H. Barrios, Raghunadharao Digumarti, Jagdev Singh Sekhon, Antonio Freire, V Ramasubramanian, Ignace Demeyer, Márcio Nucci, Amorn Leelarasamee, Frédérique Jacobs, Johan Decruyenaere, Didier Pittet, Andrew J. Ullmann, Luis Ostrosky‐Zeichner, Olivier Lortholary, Sonja Koblinger, Heike Diekmann-Berndt, Oliver A. Cornely,

Oral health in cancer treatment

Summary Background Invasive candidosis is increasingly prevalent in seriously ill patients. Our aim was to compare micafungin with liposomal amphotericin B for the treatment of adult patients with candidaemia or invasive candidosis. Methods We did a double-blind, randomised, multinational non-inferiority study to compare micafungin (100 mg/day) with liposomal amphotericin B (3 mg/kg per day) as first-line treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidosis. The primary endpoint was treatment success, defined as both a clinical and a mycological response at the end of treatment. Primary analyses were done on a per-protocol basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00106288. Findings 264 individuals were randomly assigned to treatment with micafungin; 267 were randomly assigned to receive liposomal amphotericin B. 202 individuals in the micafungin group and 190 in the liposomal amphotericin B group were included in the per-protocol analyses. Treatment success was observed for 181 (89·6%) patients treated with micafungin and 170 (89·5%) patients treated with liposomal amphotericin B. The difference in proportions, after stratification by neutropenic status at baseline, was 0·7% (95% CI −5·3 to 6·7). Efficacy was independent of the Candida spp and primary site of infection, as well as neutropenic status, APACHE II score, and whether a catheter was removed or replaced during the study. There were fewer treatment-related adverse events—including those that were serious or led to treatment discontinuation—with micafungin than there were with liposomal amphotericin B. Interpretation Micafungin was as effective as—and caused fewer adverse events than—liposomal amphotericin B as first-line treatment of candidaemia and invasive candidosis.