A Randomized, Controlled, Noninferiority, Multicenter Trial of Systemic vs Intralesional Treatment With Meglumine Antimoniate for Cutaneous Leishmaniasis in Brazil

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2023
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
Autores
LYRA, Marcelo R.
OLIVEIRA, Liliane F. A.
SCHUBACH, Armando O.
SAMPAIO, Raimunda N. R.
RODRIGUES, Bruna C.
HUEB, Marcia
COTA, Glaucia
SILVA, Rosiana E.
FRANCESCONI, Fabio
POMPILIO, Mauricio A.
Citação
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, v.77, n.4, p.574-582, 2023
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background Meglumine antimoniate (MA) remains the main treatment for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). Uncontrolled studies suggest that intralesional MA (IL-MA) may be noninferior and safer than systemic MA (S-MA). Methods Multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label, phase 3 clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of IL-MA in 3 infiltrations at 14-day intervals compared with S-MA (10-20 mg Sb5+/kg/day, 20 days) for CL, with noninferiority margin of 20%. Primary and secondary outcomes were definitive cure at day 180 and epithelialization rate at day 90 of treatment, respectively. A 2-year follow-up was performed to assess relapses and emergence of mucosal lesions. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored according to the Division of AIDS AE grading system. Results We evaluated 135 patients. The cure rates (95% confidence interval) for IL-MA and S-MA treatment were, respectively, 82.8% (70.5-91.4) and 67.8% (53.3-78.3) per protocol (PP) and 70.6% (58.3-81.0) and 59.7% (47.0-71.5) per intention to treat (ITT). The epithelialization rates of the IL-MA and S-MA treatment were, respectively, 79.3% (66.6-88 + 8) and 71.2% (57.9-82.2) PP and 69.1% (55.2-78.5) and 64.2% (50.0-74.2) ITT. AEs in the IL-MA and S-MA groups were, respectively, clinical, 45.6% and 80.6%; laboratory, 26.5% and 73.1%; and electrocardiogram, 8.8% and 25.4%. Ten participants in the S-MA group and 1 in the IL-MA group were discontinued due to severe or persistent AEs. Conclusions IL-MA provides a similar cure rate and results in less toxicity compared with S-MA and may be used as first-line therapy for CL patients. This multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label, phase 3 clinical trial, we evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of intralesional infiltration meglumine antimoniate (IL-MA) compared with systemic MA (S-MA) for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). IL-MA provides similar cure rate and results in less toxicity compared with S-MA. Clinical Trials Registration. REBEC: RBR-6mk5n4.
Palavras-chave
clinical trial, meglumine antimoniate, intralesional injections, cutaneous leishmaniasis
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/57954
Referências
  1. Añez N, 2018, ACTA TROP, V185, P261, DOI 10.1016/j.actatropica.2018.06.001
  2. Cardona-Arias JA, 2015, PLOS ONE, V10, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0122569
  3. Armijos RX, 2004, ACTA TROP, V91, P153, DOI 10.1016/j.actatropica.2004.03.009
  4. Blum J, 2012, INT HEALTH, V4, P153, DOI 10.1016/j.inhe.2012.06.004
  5. Brahim LR, 2017, MEM I OSWALDO CRUZ, V112, P838, DOI 10.1590/0074-02760160478
  6. Brito NC, 2017, PLOS ONE, V12, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0184777
  7. Cota GF, 2016, PLOS ONE, V11, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0149697
  8. da Silva RE, 2018, MEM I OSWALDO CRUZ, V113, P71, DOI 10.1590/0074-027601700125
  9. da Silva RE, 2016, MEM I OSWALDO CRUZ, V111, P512, DOI 10.1590/0074-02760160183
  10. Vasconcellos ÉCFE, 2012, AM J TROP MED HYG, V87, P257, DOI 10.4269/ajtmh.2012.11-0612
  11. Duque MCD, 2019, ACTA TROP, V193, P176, DOI 10.1016/j.actatropica.2019.03.007
  12. Duque MCD, 2016, REV SOC BRAS MED TRO, V49, P774, DOI 10.1590/0037-8682-0213-2016
  13. Eid D, 2019, BMC INT HEALTH HUM R, V19, DOI 10.1186/s12914-019-0196-4
  14. FARIS RM, 1993, INT J DERMATOL, V32, P610, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-4362.1993.tb05044.x
  15. Pimentel MIF, 2017, REV SOC BRAS MED TRO, V50, P269, DOI 10.1590/0037-8682-0323-2016
  16. Vasconcellos EDCE, 2014, REV INST MED TROP SP, V56, P361, DOI 10.1590/S0036-46652014000400016
  17. Gadelha ADR., 1990, AN BRAS DERMATOL, V65, P201
  18. Limachi-Choque Jhonny Wilson, 2020, Gac Med Bol, V43, P18
  19. Lyra MR., 2016, REV SOC BRAS MED TRO, V58, P1
  20. Ministerio da Saude Brazil. DATASUS, 2007, LEISHM TEG AM CAS CO
  21. Ministerio da Saude Secretaria de Vigilancia em Saude Departamento de Vigilancia das Doencas Transmissivei, 2017, MAN VIG LEISH TEG
  22. Oliveira LF, 2011, ACTA TROP, V118, P87, DOI 10.1016/j.actatropica.2011.02.007
  23. Oliveira-Ribeiro C, 2021, PLOS NEGLECT TROP D, V15, DOI 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009734
  24. Oliveira-Ribeiro C, 2017, BMC INFECT DIS, V17, DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2658-4
  25. OliveiraNeto MP, 1997, INT J DERMATOL, V36, P463, DOI 10.1046/j.1365-4362.1997.00188.x
  26. Olliaro P, 2013, PLOS NEGLECT TROP D, V7, DOI 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002130
  27. Organizacion Panamericana de la Salud, 2019, MANUAL PROCEDIMIENTO
  28. Pan American Health Organization, 2022, GUIDELINE TREATMENT, DOI [10.37774/9789275125038, DOI 10.37774/9789275125038]
  29. Ramalho DB, 2018, MEM I OSWALDO CRUZ, V113, DOI 10.1590/0074-02760180200
  30. Rodrigues BC, 2020, INT J PARASITOL-DRUG, V14, P257, DOI 10.1016/j.ijpddr.2020.11.002
  31. Saheki MN, 2017, PLOS ONE, V12, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0178592
  32. Schubach AO., 2014, LEISHMANIOSES CONTIN, P391
  33. SHARQUIE KE, 1988, BRIT J DERMATOL, V119, P53, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2133.1988.tb07100.x
  34. Soto J, 2016, AM J TROP MED HYG, V94, P852, DOI 10.4269/ajtmh.15-0640
  35. Soto J, 2013, CLIN INFECT DIS, V56, P1255, DOI 10.1093/cid/cit049
  36. Tuon FF, 2008, INT J DERMATOL, V47, P109, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-4632.2008.03417.x
  37. Word Health Organization, 2010, CONTR LEISHM REP M W
  38. World Health Organization, 2016, WKLY EPIDEMIOL REC, V91, P287, DOI 10.1186/1750-9378-2-15.VOIR

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MIP
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/46
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - ODS/03